Collins et al v. Covenant Trucking Company, Incorporated et al, No. 5:2013cv00257 - Document 57 (E.D.N.C. 2014)
Court Description: ORDER granting 50 Motion to Certify Class. Signed by Chief Judge James C. Dever III on 4/22/2014. (Sawyer, D.)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Collins et al v. Covenant Trucking Company, Incorporated et al Doc. 57 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION Case No.: 5:13-CV-257-D WILLIE COLLINS and LARRY EDGERTON, both individually and behalf of all other similarly situated persons, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiffs, V. COVENANT TRUCKING COMPANY, INCORPORATED, JOE N. JONES, JONES, and CARLTON JONES, ORDER FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION ) ) ) WENDY C. ) ) ) Defendants. ________________________________________ ) This matter is before the Court on the Joint Motion by the named plaintiff, Jones, defendants Wendy C. Jones, Covenant Trucking Company, and Carlton Jones "the Covenant defendants") support of their Joe N. (hereinafter referred to as in furtherance of their settlement agreement to Certify This Action As a Rule 23 (b) (3) In Incorporated, joint motion, the and FLSA collective action. parties have filed a joint memorandum of law. The Court has reviewed all of the relevant pleadings and exhibits in the record concerning this motion and has determined that the named plaintiffs have met their burden of proof under 29 U.S. C. Rule 23 (b) {3), Fed.R.Civ.P., to have the plaintiffs' §216 (b) and First and Second Claim for Relief (Doc. 1 at 6-10 (~~16-22), at 12-18 (~~26-32), at 23-26 (~~41-44), at 28-31 (~~53-61) Fair Labor Standards Act and at 32-33 ("FLSA"), North Carolina Wage and Hour Act seq. 29 U.S.C. ("NCWHA"), (~~64-69), §§ pursuant to the 201 et seq., N.C.Gen.Stat. and the §§95-25.1 et certified for settlement purposes as a collective action under 29 1 Dockets.Justia.com U.S. C. § Covenant 216 (b) , defendants December 31, §216(b) and a for 2013. class action under Rule the time period from 23 (b) (3) April 8, against 2010 the through Collective action certification is allowed under for only those persons who have filed a written Consent to Sue pursuant to 29 U.S.C. §216(b) on or before the date this Court files any Order approving the terms of the proposed settlement between the named plaintiff, the class and collective action he has been certified to represent, and the Covenant defendants. The Second defendants by collective Claim the action for named Relief plaintiffs they seek to Second plaintiffs Claim seek for Relief liquidated against damages Jones, and Carlton Jones defendants") 207 (a) to is the based against the 29 U.S. C. defendants Covenant Trucking Company, c. and represent liquidated damages under the FLSA, that alleged on members a the of collective §§206 (a) Covenant the Covenant the FLSA action for and 216 (b) . defendants, alleged In the failure of Incorporated, Joe N. Jones, Wendy (hereinafter referred to as the "Covenant to pay wages at the overtime rate required by 29 U.S. C. the plaintiffs and all members of the § collective group of persons defined in ~~16-22 of the Complaint as follows: All dump truck drivers employed by one or more of the Covenant defendants for at least one month at any time in the time period starting with the first workweek ending on or after April 11, 2010 through the date final judgment is entered in this action, who were paid at less than the overtime rate required by the FLSA for all hours worked for any workweek in that same time period in which any such driver (s) was employed in excess of 40 hours in the same workweek. Complaint, Doc. 1 at 6 and 8-9 (~~16-17 and 19-20). The First Claim for Relief alleged against those same defendants is a NCWHA, statutory claim for back wages and liquidated damages under the N.C.Gen.Stat. §§ 95-25.6, 95-25.13(1}-(2), 2 95-25.22(a), and 95- 25.22 (a1) based upon the Covenant defendants' failure to pay promised wages to the plaintiffs and the class members at the promised wage rate the defendants disclosed to them pursuant to 2 5 . 13 ( 1) - ( 2 ) and 13 N. C . A. C . Tit . 12 § . 0 8 0 3 . Relief against payment of defendants' with the Covenant back wages and defendants, N.C.Gen.Stat. §§ 95- In that First Claim for the named liquidated damages plaintiffs based on the seek Covenant alleged use of a number of different employment practices respect to payment of promised wages that resulted in the underpayment of promised wages to the named plaintiffs and all members of the Rule 23(b) (3) class of persons defined in ,,26-28 of the Complaint as follows: All dump truck drivers employed by one or more of the Covenant defendants for at least one month at any time in in the time period starting with the first workweek ending on or after April 8, 2011 through the date final judgment is entered in this action, and who were not paid all wages when due at the hourly wage rate disclosed to them pursuant N.C.Gen.Stat. §§ 95-25.13(1)-(2) for all hours worked in those same workweeks regardless of the total of hours worked in any such workweek. Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification (Doc. 43 at 1 (,(1)) Pursuant to the terms of a settlement of this action between the parties, the parties have stipulated to class certification plaintiff's NCWHA claim for the time period from April 8, December 31, 2013, the last date on which the of the 2011 through Covenant defendants employed any new dump truck driver not already covered by the terms of the Settlement Agreement described in this Order. stipulation and other evidence before the Court, Based upon that the Court finds that the plaintiffs' NCWHA stipulated class consists of more than 40 persons that are listed in Doc. 42-29 filed with the Court. To date, the named plaintiffs have filed a written consent to sue under 29 U.S.C. §216(b) and there are seven (7) other "similarly situated" members of the FLSA 3 collective action who have filed Consents to Sue pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 216(b) that the named plaintiffs seek to represent against the Covenant defendants. Some of the NCWHA and FLSA collective action members are employed in transient, long haul trucking or reside in another state. The Court finds that the named plaintiffs and the workers in the FLSA collective action represent under 29 U.S.C. meaning of 29 U.S.C. collective action of employees § 216(b) that the plaintiffs seek to are "similarly situated" within the §216(b), and are sufficiently numerous to warrant certification under that statute. Bulmaro Ceras- Campo, et al. v. WF Partnership, et al., Civil Action No. 5:10-CV-215-BO (E.D.N.C. Order of Class Certification filed May 11, 2012) (Doc. at 3-4; Vincente Jimenez-Orozco v. Baker Roofing Co., 5:05-CV-34-FL, Dec. 21, See also 2007 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 93860, 2007); Leyva v. Buley, Haywood v. Barnes, at *9 125 F.R.D. 109 512, F.R.D. Civil Action No. (E.D.N.C. 514-15 568, 43-2), Order filed (E.D.Wa. 1989). 576-77 (E.D.N.C. 1986) (citing case authority in which classes composed of as few as 18 persons were certified under Rule 23{b) (3), Fed.R.Civ.P.). The Court also agrees with the factual allegations in ~28 of the Complaint 1 at 14) (Doc. and finds that the class of persons that the named plaintiff seeks to represent under Rule 23(b){3), Fed.R.Civ.P., with respect to their First Claim for Relief under the NCWHA (Doc. 1 at 12-18 (~~26-32), at 23-26 (~~41-44), at 28-31 (~~53-61) and at 32-33 to the North Carolina Wage and Hour Act 25 .1 et seq., (~~64-66), pursuant ("NCWHA"), N.C.Gen.Stat. §§95- is sufficiently numerous and adequately defined to meet the standard for numerosity set forth in Rule 23 (a) (1), Fed.R.Civ.P. Id. In addition, the Court finds under Rule 23 (a) (2}, Fed.R.Civ.P., that the questions of law or fact common to the NCWHA class alleged in 4 ~~29-30 of the Complaint (Doc. 1 at 14-17) do exist with respect to the individual claims by the named plaintiffs set forth in First Claim for Relief under the NCWHA that is alleged in the plaintiffs' Complaint. See Vincente Jimenez-Orozco v. Baker Roofing Co., Civil Action No. 5:05- CV-34-FL, Dec. 21, 2007 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 2007); Leyva v. Haywood v. Barnes, 93860, Buley, 109 F.R.D. for the reasons stated in *9-*11 125 F.R.D. 568, ~31 at 576-77 512, (E.D.N.C. 514-15 (E.D.N.C. of the Complaint Order filed (E.D.Wa. 1986). (Doc. 1989); Similarly, 1 at 17-18), the claim of the named plaintiffs under the NCWHA are typical of the NCWHA claim of the class members that the named plaintiffs seek to represent. See Jimenez-Orozco v. Baker Roofing Co., supra, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93860, at *11-*12, Leyva v. Buley, supra; Haywood v. Barnes, 109 F.R.D. at 577-78. The that court's indicates defendants, determination that the named on typicality plaintiffs is allege based upon evidence that the Covenant as the employer of the named plaintiffs and the class they seek to represent, allegedly did not pay them wages at the rate that the Covenant defendants disclosed pursuant to N.C.Gen.Stat. (2) §§95-25.13(1)- for various workweeks when those wages were due for the driver work that they performed in the time period beginning on April 8, ending with December 31, 2013. supported by the plaintiffs' 2011 and This finding of typicality is further allegation and documentary evidence that the Covenant defendants violated their disclosures under N.C.Gen.Stat. §§ 95-25.13(1)-(2) with the named plaintiffs and the class they seek to represent to pay wages when due of the plaintiffs and the class) (in their alleged capacity as employers at the promised and disclosed rate in violation of G.S. §95-25.6 based upon the Covenant defendants' use of a number of employment practices with respect to payment of promised wages 5 that are documented by a series of Declarations and wage records that the plaintiffs have presented to the Court. The commonality or similarity that the named plaintiffs share with those class members they seek to represent lies in the fact that the issues raised in the claims of the named plaintiffs are common to those of the persons whom they seek to represent with respect to the following issues: {1) Whether the Covenant defendants maintained an unwritten and unannounced defendants practice concerning and policy promised of wages the in Covenant which the Covenant defendants departed from their regular timecounting procedure for counting the time recorded on each driver employee's timecard of rounding the punch out time to the nearest quarter reducing that time by always when the elapsed time hour, and rounding that between the time instead time down marked the shift-ending fuel receipt and the punch out time marked on the employee's time card exceeded 10 minutes? {2) Whether the Covenant defendants deducted from the elapsed time between the moment in time that the named plaintiffs and other similarly situated drivers punched in their time card to start recorded work time and the moment in time that the punched out his time card at the end of his shift by arbitrarily denying credit for all hours worked by deducting or not counting anywhere from 15 minutes of "no pay" time to hours of "no pay" time from the elapsed time between punch in and punch 6 out clock time recorded on each driver employee's timecard? ( 3) Whether the Covenant compensate as work defendants time certain failed to count "off-the-clock", and pre- trip inspection work? Whether (4) the Covenant defendants failed to count compensate as work time certain "off-the-clock", trip and post- inspection work described in Covenant's Driver's Handbook & Safety Manual (~17(b)) and Doc. that 43 at 3 is described in Doc. (~(4)A.)(Plaintiffs' 1 Rule 23 Motion)? The named plaintiffs under Rule 23 (a) (4), are adequate Fed.R.Civ.P. representatives of the Present counsel for the plaintiffs are experienced attorney who have litigated other class actions. e.g., Bulmaro Ceras-Campo, et class al. v. WF Parnership, et al., See, supra (Robert J. Willis counsel for class action involving more than 100 H-2A workers); Jimenez-Orozco v. Baker Roofing Co., supra (Robert J. counsel for class action involving close to 1,000 workers); Willis Haywood v. Barnes, 109 F.R.D. at 573 and 579 (Robert J. Willis acts as counsel for class action involving almost 800 migrant workers) . An affidavit of lead counsel demonstrates that the named plaintiffs have maintained their interest in this litigation and made themselves available to plaintiff's counsel throughout this litigation, have provided sworn Declarations and detailed responses to interrogatory and document discovery requests from the Covenant defendants. Therefore, requirements of Rule 23(a) for certification of class action have been met. the Court finds that all of the Having made this determination, the Court further determines that 7 questions of law or fact common to the class members in the plaintiffs' NCWHA class claim predominate individual class members, available methods for controversy. See U.S.Dist.LEXIS 109 F.R.D. Barnes, fair and Jimenez-Orozco at any questions affecting only and that a class action is superior to other the 93860, over v. *13-*15, at 577-78. efficient Baker Leyva adjudication Roofing v. Buley, Co., of this supra, 2007 supra; Haywood v. This finding is based upon the total absence of any questions of fact affecting any individual class members with respect to the NCWHA claim of the NCWHA class members and the four (4) common issues enumerated in pages 6-7 above of this Order that the named plaintiffs and the NCWHA class members all share. Accordingly, the joint motion for certification of the plaintiffs' First Claim for Relief under the NCWHA as a 23(b)(3), Fed.R.Civ.P., class action under Rule is GRANTED for the time period from April 8, 2011 through December 31, 2013 for those persons included in the class definition set forth above. The joint motion for class certification of the FLSA collective action that is defined above under the FLSA is also GRANTED with respect to all those Consent to Sue under 29 U.S.C. persons §216(b) who have filed a written on or before the date on which the Court files any Order approving the terms of the proposed settlement between the named plaintiffs and the Covenant defendants. The named plaintiffs shall provide certification of both the Rule 23 (b) (3) written notice of this class and the statutory class under 29 U.S.C. §216(b) and the terms of the proposed settlement of that Rule 23(b) (3) this Court class and statutory class in a Notice to be approved by in English. That Notice shall then be translated into Spanish for distribution to all putative class and collective action members by U.S. Mail, first class delivery, 8 postage prepaid, to the valid, last known address of each class and collective action member on or before the date falling thirty (30) days after the date on which the Court approves the content and method of notice distribution to those class and FLSA collective action members in this case. the direct mailing to the members of action that the Court has certified To facilitate the class and FLSA collective in this Order, the Covenant defendants shall provide the plaintiff's counsel with any information in the possession of any of the Covenant defendants as to the valid, known mailing address of each class member within fifteen last (15) days of the date of this order to allow the plaintiffs to provide that notice. In addition, within sixty (60) days after the date on which the Court approves the content and method of notice distribution to the class and collective action members in this case, the Covenant defendants shall provide by hand delivery a summary of the Notice to Class approved by the Court to each member of the class and/ or FLSA collective action certified by the Court who is employed by one or more of the Covenant defendants to work under the H-2A program in 2014 where that member(s) continues to be an employee of defendant Covenant Trucking Company, Incorporated. IT IS SO ORDERED. DONE and ORDERED at 11. RG..IQ.aj h , North Carolina, this the day of --L-A"-"o....at •'..L-1_ _ _ _ _ _ , 2 o~f:.. ....... I COURT JUDGE 9 Exhibit 1 A. This Settlement Agreement ("Agreement") is made between plaintiffs Willie Collins and Lany Edgerton and defendants Covenant Trucking Company, Inc., Joe N. Jones, Wendy C. Jones and Carlton Jones (hereinafter referred to as "the Covenant defendants") for the purpose of settling the various claims, controversies and disputes among these parties arising out of the facts and circumstances relating to litigation styled as Willie Collins and Larry Edgerton, eta/. v. Covenant Trucking Company, Inc., Joe N. Jones, Wendy C. Jones, and Carlton Jones, Civil Action No: 5-13-CV-257-D (E.D.N.C. Complaint filed April 8, 2013) (hereinafter referred to as the "Lawsuit"). B. In the Lawsuit, Plaintiffs asserted claims against the Covenant defendants for violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 201, et seq., and the N01th Carolina Wage and Hour Act, N.C.G.S. § 95-25.1, et seq. C. The mediation of this case was conducted on January 31, 2014, by M. Robin Davis and the parties reached the following agreement: 1. The patties agree to file a joint motion and supp01ting memorandum for preliminary and final approval of class celtification for settlement purposes under Rule 23(b)(3), Fed. R. Civ. P, for the following class and collective action cetiification pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 216(b) of the following collective action: a. Rule 23(b)(3) Settlement Class: All dump truck drivers employed by one or more of the Covenant defendants for at least one month at any time in the time period statting with the first workweek ending on or after April 8, 2011 through the date final judgment is entered in this action, and who were not paid all wages when due at the hourly wage rate disclosed to them pmsuant N.C.Gen.Stat. §§ 9525.13(1)-(2) for all hours worked in those same workweeks regardless of the total of hours worked in any such workweek. Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification (Doc. 43 at 1 (~(1)). Page 1 of9 b. FLSA Collective Action: All dump truck drivers employed by one or more of the Covenant defendants for at least one month at any time in the time period starting with the first workweek ending on or after April 11, 2010 through·the date final judgment is entered in this action, who were paid at less than the overtime rate required by the FLSA for all hours worked for any workweek in that same time period in which any such driver(s) was employed in excess of 40 hours in the same workweek. · Complaint, Doc. I at 6 and 8-9 (~116-17 and 19-20). 2. Defendants will pay to and/or on behalf of Plaintiffs the aggregate sum of Ninety-Two Thousand Dollars $92,000.00 ("Settlement Amount"). The Settlement Amount will be allocated among the named Plaintiffs, the unnamed Plaintiffs who have filed Consents/Declarations, the as yet unnamed Plaintiffs who have not yet filed Consents (including any reversion amounts), Costs and Attomeys' Fees as follows: a. Willie Colllins, named plaintiff- $7,764.00 b. Larry Edgerton, named plaintiff- $5,520.00 c. Albert Jackson, declarant & consenting person - $1,422.00 (calculated at $79/month for 18 months of covered employment by Covenant defendants). d. Pete McKinnon, declarant & consenting person - $2,212 (calculated at $79/month for 28 months of covered employment by Cov~nant defendants). e. Bennie Yarborough, declarant & consenting person - $2,2212.00 (calculated at $79/month for 28 months of covered employment by Covenant defendants). f. Mat·k Hargrove, Sr., declat·ant & consenting person - $592.50 (calculated at $79/month for 7.5 months of covered employment by Covenant defendants). g. Derrick Catter, declarant & consenting person - $592.50 (calculated at $79/month for 7. 5 months of covered employment by Covenant defendants). Page 2 of9' h. Dietrich Thompson, declarant & consenting person - $1,185.00 (calculated at $79/month for 15 months of covered employment by Covenant defendants). i. Eight thousand eight hundred dollars and no cents ($8,800.00) for putative members of settlement class and Donald Ray Smith funded and payable at rate of $10.73 for each month worked for 41 months for estimated 20 regularly employed drivers. j. Seven thousand seven hundred dollars and no cents ($7,700.00) for payment of out-of-pocket litigation expenses paid by plaintiffs' counsel to date. k. Fifty-four thousand dollars ($54,000.00) for payment of attorney fees to the Law Office of Robert J. Willis, P.A. and The Law Office of Michael Jacula, P.C., with seventy-five percent (75%) of that amount payable to the Law Office of Robelt J. Willis, P.A. and twenty-five percent (25%) of that amount payable to the Law Office of Michael Jacula, P.C. 3. For tax purposes, payments allocated to the named Plaintiffs and the 6 additional persons named in ~~C.2.d.-i. above who have, as of the date of this Agreement completed Consents and Declarations, 50% of the payment shall be treated as wages, and the Covenant defendants will take normal and ordinary payroll withholdings from the payment amount. The remaining 50% of any payments shall be paid without withholding. The Covenant defendants will issue W-2 and/or 1099 reports to all pet·sons who receive settlement payments, as required by law. 4. The Settlement Amount will be paid on the following schedule: $30,000 paid within 30 days of the Order of the Coutt approving the Settlement; the balance payable at the rate of $5,000 per month on the last business day of each month thereafter until paid in full. Page 3 of9 5. The Settlement Amount will be payable pursuant to Consent Judgment and Order, to be approved by all counsel. 6. The named Plaintiffs and the Covenant defendants will enter into a Settlement Agreement and Consent Judgment that will contain tetms typical to such agreements as well as the following consent decree provisions: • Down time will be added to hours worked for purposes of determining overtime • Employees will be notified in writing by the next business day on which they work if their pay is docked and the reason the pay is being docked. This will be recorded on the daily employee produCtion sheets or time cards by the employer on the day that the employer (or any lead person designated by the employer) observes the basis for the deduction. This shall not be construed to limit the employers' right to discipline employees for work violations including time card violations. 7. The parties have agreed to the following tetms ~nd conditions of settlement on behalf of the members of the class and collective action for which they have agreed to file the Joint Motion that is described in ~C.l. above of this Settlement Agreement: a. Upon final approval of the terms of this Settlement Agreement by the Com1, payment to the named plaintiff and each class and/or collective action member entitled to compensation under one or more paragraph of this Settlement Agreement shall be entitled to receive that compensation by provision to the office of Robet1 J. Willis, P.O. Box 1269 Raleigh, NC 27601, fax number (919) 821-1763, e-mail address: ycaceres@tjwillis-law.com, by facsimile, U.S. Mail, and/or e-mail of a copy of a government-issued photographic identification such as driver's license of the named plaintiffs and each such class and/or collective action membet· within the time period set and approved by the Court for the submission of that document. Subject to the availability of funds received from Covenant defendants pursuant to · Page 4 of9 the provisions of ~~C.2.a.-i. and C.4. above of the Settlement Agreement, claims shall then be paid as they come in to the Law Office ofRobett J. Willis, P.A. with the costs of transmission to each such claimant by any form other than U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, first class delivery, or inperson delivery in-person delivery at the Law Office ofRobet1 J. Willis, P.A. in Raleigh, North Carolina or the Law Office of Michael Jacula, P.C. in Wake Forest, Notih Carolina to be deducted from the amount each class and/or collective action member is due. b. One hundred percent (1 00%) of any unclaimed proceeds after the time period established and approved by the Court for Rule 23(b)(3) and FLSA collective action members to claim any payment of compensation due under the terms of this settlement shaH revert to the Frum Labor Research Project d/b/a the Campaign for Migrant Worker Justice ("CMWJ"), a § 501(c)(3) non-profit charitable corporation organized to provide education and support services to migrant and seasonal agricultural workers. c. The patties to this agreement shall file a joint motion and supporting memorandum for: (i) approval of preliminary and final notices to the members of the putative class and collective action regarding any Order the Court may enter with respect to certification of this action as a class and/or collective action and its preliminary or final approval of the terms of this settlement, (ii) the method of distribution to be used to distribute any notice to the putative and/or actual members of the class and/or collective action descdbed in ~C.l. above of this Settlement Agreement pursuant to Rule 23(c)(2), Fed.R.Civ.P., and/or 29 U.S.C. § 216(b). Page 5 of9 8. After payment of all of the sums provided herein, the Covenant defendants, their predecessors, successors, affiliates, agents, employees, officers, directors, attorneys, assigns, and each of them, is released, acquitted, dismissed, and forever discharged for any and all claims, demands, costs, causes of action, demands, damages (actual and punitive), costs, judgments, expenses, liabilities, attorneys fees and legal costs, injunctive or declaratory ' ' relief, whether known or unknown, whether in law or in equity, whether in tort or in contract, of any kind or character, of the plaintiff, or of the members of the Rule 23(b)(3) and FLSA collective action members, by reasons of any matter, known or unknown, arising from, or relating in any way to the matters described in the Lawsuit, except that the parties reserve the right to bring all necessary actions to enforce the obligations incun·ed by the Covenant defendant pursuant to this Settlement Agreement or any other document executed pursuant to this Settlement Agreement. 9. The Covenant defendants have denied and continue to deny any liability. Nothing in this agreement shall constitute any admission or evidence of any violation of the law or other wrongful activity. 10. Plaintiffs' Counsel shall be responsible to draft the Settlement Agreement, the Consent Judgment, the Joint Motion for Approval of Settlement and all necessary accompanying documents, all of which shall be subject to the review and approval of counsel for Defendants. 11. The Parties agree that the Joint Motion for Approval of Settlement and all necessary documents will be completed and filed with the Comt no later than sixty (60) days from the date ofthis Agreement. Page 6 of9 12. Bach Party shall be responsible for !-S orthe mediator's fee. 13. The n11med plaintiffs Willie Collins and Larry Edgerton and the Covenant defendants wish to resolve all claims and controversy between them arising out of this action and hereby enter Into this Agreement for that express purpose. D. BlndJng. It is understood and agreed by the parties that this Agreement shall be binding and inure to the benefit of the Plaintiffs and the Covenant defendants and their respective, heirs, representatives, successors and assigns. B. Authority. Plaintiffs' Counsel and Counsel for the Covenant defendants each affirm that they have full authority to bind the respective parties whom they represent In this action and to enter into this Agreement on behalf of those parties. F. Modlfic:aUon, This Agreement may be modified only by a written document signed by all parties that makes specific referenc6 to this Agreement. 0, Multiple Originals nnd Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in multiple orlglnnls and separate counterparts each of which shall constitute an original and all of which taken together shall constitute the whole Agreement. Ph\intiff, Willie Collins . Date: 3-2o- \ l4 d'<t..~rry [~ Plaintiff, Ed on Date: '3/tlol!~j= Page 7 of9 By:~=-=---------~ PdntedName: - - - - - - - Date: 3 J ll.( / 'G \:) ( I.( Page 8 of9 ACKNOWLEDGED AND AOREBD: ·~ (, dL.i-rt Theodore C. Edwards, II, Esq. Attorney for. Defendants : Date: ) / ?S: / (..<':)11../ Page 9 of9
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
