Dandison et al v. Hank's Furniture Inc
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|Date Filed||#||Document Text|
|December 23, 2015
JUDGMENT: The complaint is dismissed with prejudice. To implement the parties' stipulation, the Court retains jurisdiction over settlement-related matters until 15 March 2016. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 12/23/2015. (jak)
|November 19, 2015
ORDER approving the parties' settlement agreement, 44 . The proposed notice is clear and adequate and the Court approves it too. The Court decertifies the conditionally certified collective action described in its 11 August 2015 Order, 32 . Th e parties' settlement on a broader scale moots the smaller group. The Court certifies (finally, not conditionally) the following group as a settlement collective action: All former sales associates at any Hank's location who were employed b etween 26 January 2013 and 26 January 2015, and who didn't participate in the Department of Labor settlement for the Bowman Road store in Little Rock, Arkansas. The parties should implement the settlement with notice and disbursement as soon as practicable. Joint status report due by 18 December 2015. Motion 38 granted. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 11/19/2015. (jak)
|May 15, 2015
ORDER: Motion, 9 , granted as modified. Motion, 20 , granted. The Court directs the parties to confer more about notice and submit a joint final draft by 29 May 2015 that conforms to this Order. Hank's must provide plaintiffs with a list of potential collective-action members by 12 June 2015. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 5/15/2015. (jak)
Access additional case information on PACER
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 Arkansas Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
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.
Why Is My Information Online?