Navarro v. Encino Motorcars, LLC, No. 13-55323 (9th Cir. 2015)Annotate this Case
Defendant, a car dealership, employed or employs Plaintiffs as “service advisors.” Plaintiffs filed this action alleging, inter alia, that Defendant violated the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) by failing to pay overtime wages. The district court dismissed the overtime claim, concluding that Plaintiffs fell within a statutory exemption from the the FLSA’s overtime pay requirements for “any salesman, parts man, or mechanic primarily engaged in selling or servicing automobiles.” Plaintiffs appealed, arguing that the courts must defer to the United States Department of Labor’s regulatory definitions. The Ninth Circuit reversed the dismissal of the FLSA overtime claim and supplemental state-law claims, holding that, where there are two reasonable ways to interpret the exemption, and the Department has chosen one interpretation, the Court must defer to that choice pursuant to Chevron; and (2) because Plaintiffs did not meet the regulatory definitions, they are not exempt from the FLSA’s overtime wage provisions. Remanded.
- Encino Motorcars, LLC v. Navarro, No. 16-1362 (U.S. Apr. 02, 2018)
- Navarro v. Encino Motorcars, No. 13-55323 (9th Cir. Jan. 09, 2017)
- Encino Motorcars, LLC v. Navarro, No. 15-415 (U.S. Jun. 20, 2016)