Metcalfe v. Revention, Inc. et al
| Chad Metcalfe |
| Revention, Inc. and Jeff Doyle |
| 4:2010cv03515 |
| September 28, 2010 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Texas |
| Houston Office |
| Harris |
| Melinda Harmon |
| Fair Labor Standards Act |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 5 |
| Defendant |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
73
OPINION AND ORDER denying 24 Motion to Dismiss; denying 25 Motion; granting in part and denying in part 31 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. This case may proceed to trial to determine the remaining issues of whether Pltfs actually performed overtime work for which Defts failed to compensate them. (Signed by Judge Melinda Harmon) Parties notified.(htippen, ) Modified on 9/10/2012 (htippen, ).
|
|
Filing
20
OPINION AND ORDER granting 13 Plaintiff's Motion For Conditional Certification And Notice To Issue To Potential Class Members. The Court further ORDERS that defts shall provide within 14 days to plaintiff with full names and contact informati on. In the event that certain addresses and/or telephone numbers are no longer valid, plaintiff may request social security numbers of individual class members. Potential class members will be permitted to file their consents to this action up to 45 days after the Notice is mailed.(Signed by Judge Melinda Harmon) Parties notified.(htippen, )
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Texas Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
