Thomas v. Maximus, Inc., No. 3:2021cv00498 - Document 63 (E.D. Va. 2022)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION (Granting in Part and Denying in Part Motion for Conditional Certification and Notice and Ordering Further Briefing). Signed by District Judge David J. Novak on 2/28/2022. (cgar)

Download PDF
Thomas v. Maximus, Inc. Case 3:21-cv-00498-DJN Document 63 Filed 02/28/22 Page 1 of 20 PageID# 1060 Doc. 63 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division SHAREY THOMAS et al., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Civil No. 3:21cv498 (DJN) MAXIMUS, INC, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION (Granting in Part and Denying in Part Motion for Conditional Certification and Notice and Ordering Further Briefing) Plaintiffs Sharey Thomas,Jennifer Gilvin,Laura Vick,Shannon Garner, Nyeshia Young and Olga Ramirez ("Plaintiffs") bring this action individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated individuals against Defendant Maximus, Inc. ("Defendant"), alleging violations of Sections 206,207 and 216(b) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, as amended 29 U.S.C. § 216(b) ("the FLSA"); the Kansas Wage Payment Act ("KWPA"),Kan. Stat. Ann.§ 44-313, et seq.; the Kentucky Wage and Hour Act ("KWHA" or "Kentucky Act"),Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. §§ 337.010,et seq.; the Louisiana Revised Statutes ("LWPA" or "Louisiana Wage Payment Act"),La. Rev. Stat.§ 23:631, et seq., Louisiana Civil Code,La. Civ. Code Arts. 2315,2298 (collectively,"Louisiana Law"); Mississippi common law; Missouri common law,Mo. Rev. Stat.§§ 290.500, et seq.; Texas common law; and Virginia common law. Plaintiffs assert their FLSA claims as a collective action under§ 16(b) of the FLSA,29 U.S.C.§ 216(b),and assert their state law claims as class actions under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23. This matter now comes before the Court on Plaintiffs' Opposed Motion for Conditional Certification and Notice Dockets.Justia.com Case 3:21-cv-00498-DJN Document 63 Filed 02/28/22 Page 2 of 20 PageID# 1061 Case 3:21-cv-00498-DJN Document 63 Filed 02/28/22 Page 3 of 20 PageID# 1062 Case 3:21-cv-00498-DJN Document 63 Filed 02/28/22 Page 4 of 20 PageID# 1063 Case 3:21-cv-00498-DJN Document 63 Filed 02/28/22 Page 5 of 20 PageID# 1064 Case 3:21-cv-00498-DJN Document 63 Filed 02/28/22 Page 6 of 20 PageID# 1065 Case 3:21-cv-00498-DJN Document 63 Filed 02/28/22 Page 7 of 20 PageID# 1066 Case 3:21-cv-00498-DJN Document 63 Filed 02/28/22 Page 8 of 20 PageID# 1067 Case 3:21-cv-00498-DJN Document 63 Filed 02/28/22 Page 9 of 20 PageID# 1068 Case 3:21-cv-00498-DJN Document 63 Filed 02/28/22 Page 10 of 20 PageID# 1069 Case 3:21-cv-00498-DJN Document 63 Filed 02/28/22 Page 11 of 20 PageID# 1070 Case 3:21-cv-00498-DJN Document 63 Filed 02/28/22 Page 12 of 20 PageID# 1071 Case 3:21-cv-00498-DJN Document 63 Filed 02/28/22 Page 13 of 20 PageID# 1072 Case 3:21-cv-00498-DJN Document 63 Filed 02/28/22 Page 14 of 20 PageID# 1073 Case 3:21-cv-00498-DJN Document 63 Filed 02/28/22 Page 15 of 20 PageID# 1074 Case 3:21-cv-00498-DJN Document 63 Filed 02/28/22 Page 16 of 20 PageID# 1075 Case 3:21-cv-00498-DJN Document 63 Filed 02/28/22 Page 17 of 20 PageID# 1076 Case 3:21-cv-00498-DJN Document 63 Filed 02/28/22 Page 18 of 20 PageID# 1077 Case 3:21-cv-00498-DJN Document 63 Filed 02/28/22 Page 19 of 20 PageID# 1078 Case 3:21-cv-00498-DJN Document 63 Filed 02/28/22 Page 20 of 20 PageID# 1079

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.