Whiteman v. Wardlaw Consulting Services, Inc. et al

Western District of Texas, txwd-6:2016-cv-00312

RESPONSE to Motion, filed by REBECCA W MEADOWS, MICHAEL N WARDLAW, William F. Wardlaw, Wardlaw Consulting Services, Inc., re {{12}} Opposed MOTION to Certify Class FLSA Collective Action filed by Plaintiff TIMOTHY WHITEMAN

Interested in this case?

Current View

Full Text

Case 6:16-cv-00312-RP-JCM Document 13 Filed 01/16/17 Page 1 of 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TIMOTHY D. WHITEMAN § § Plaintiff, § § V. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:16-CV-312-RP-JCM § WARDLAW CONSULTING SERVICES, § INC., WILLIAM F. WARDLAW, § MICHAEL N. WARDLAW and § REBECCA W. MEADOWS § § Defendants. § DEFENDANTS’ STIPULATION TO CONDITIONAL CERTIFICATION Now comes Wardlaw Consulting Services, Inc., William F. Wardlaw, Michael W. Wardlaw and Rebecca W. Meadows, Defendants and make and file this their Defendants’ Stipulation to Conditional Certification and for said Stipulation would show the Court the following: 1. Defendants stipulate that they do not oppose Plaintiff’s Motion for Conditional Certification. 2. The decision by Defendants not to oppose the conditional certification of the FLSA collective action does not constitute an admission that the named Plaintiff is similarly situated to the described class or that this action meets the conditions necessary for certification of a FLSA collective action. Defendants retain the right to move to decertify the collective and/or oppose any request by Plaintiff for final certification. 06418-001\Whiteman\Defendants’ Stipulation 1 Case 6:16-cv-00312-RP-JCM Document 13 Filed 01/16/17 Page 2 of 3 3. Defendants further stipulate that they do not oppose the proposed Order submitted by Plaintiff except as follows: a. On page 2 of the proposed Order, Defendants request that the Potential Plaintiffs have 45 days rather than 90 days to file a Consent to Join the litigation. b. On page 2 of the proposed Order, Defendants request that the Parties are directed to confer with 14 days after the close of the opt-in period to present the Court with a proposed Joint Scheduling Order. 4. Defendants’ counsel has attempted to confer with Plaintiff’s counsel regarding the dates referenced in Paragraph 3 above, without success. If the Parties are able to reach an agreement, the Parties will file a joint notice to the Court of such agreement. 5. Defendants retain all defenses including, without limitation, the defense that the statute of limitations bars, in whole or in part, the claims of any individual who opts into this lawsuit as a Plaintiff. 06418-001\Whiteman\Defendants’ Stipulation 2 Case 6:16-cv-00312-RP-JCM Document 13 Filed 01/16/17 Page 3 of 3 Respectfully submitted, SHEEHY, LOVELACE & MAYFIELD, PC/s/Philip E. McCleery Philip E. McCleery pmccleery@slmpc.com State Bar No. 13395000 David M. Mathews dmathews@slmpc.com State Bar No. 24058211 510 N. Valley Mills Drive, Suite 500 Waco, TX 76710 254.772.8022 Telephone 254.772.9297 Facsimile ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that on this 16th day of January, 2017, a true and correct copy of Defendants’ Stipulation to Conditional Certification was served via electronic mail on the following attorneys of record: ko@obrienlawpc.com Kerry V. O’Brien jdbraziel@l-b-law.com J. Derek Braziel forester@l-b-law.com Jay Forester/s/Philip E. McCleery Philip E. McCleery 06418-001\Whiteman\Defendants’ Stipulation 3