Perez et al v. Owl, Inc.
Plaintiff: Jose Perez, Alfredo Santos and Douglas Richey
Defendant: Owl, Inc.
Case Number: 6:2017cv01092
Filed: June 15, 2017
Court: US District Court for the Middle District of Florida
Office: Orlando Office
County: Orange
Presiding Judge: Carlos E. Mendoza
Presiding Judge: Gregory J. Kelly
Nature of Suit: Fair Labor Standards Act
Cause of Action: 29 U.S.C. ยง 201
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
August 16, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 218 It is ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 216) is ADOPTED and made a part of this Order. The Plaintiff's Second Assented-To Motion for Settlement Approval (Doc. 212) is GRANTED in part. The procedure, form, and c ontent the "Notice of Collective Action Settlement" (Doc. 212-2 at 2) shall be REVISED so that the description of the split as two-thirds (or 66.7%) for wages and one-third (or 33.3%) for liquidated damages in the Notice. The pa rties shall adhere to the deadlines set forth in the Second Motion for Approval (Doc. 212) and the Settlement Agreement (Doc. 188-1). The Clerk is directed to enter final judgment in favor of Plaintiffs Jose Perez, Alfredo Santos, and Douglas Ric hey, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, on Count I of the Complaint against Owl, Inc. in the amount of $350,000. In the event that the Eleventh Circuit affirms the rulings in this case, the settlement funds will be distri buted as set forth in Plaintiffs' Second Motion For Approval of the Settlement (Doc. 212), the Settlement Agreement (Doc. 188-1), and the Addendum (Doc. 212-1). The Clerk is directed to close this case. Signed by Judge Carlos E. Mendoza on 8/16/2022. (ALL)
March 30, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 88 ORDER denying 29 Motion to Certify Class; Adopting in part and rejecting in part Report and Recommendations - re 78 Report and Recommendations. On or before April 13, 2018, Plaintiffs may file a renewed motion for issuance of notice consistent with this Order. Signed by Judge Carlos E. Mendoza on 3/30/2018. (DJD)
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 Florida Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Perez et al v. Owl, Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Jose Perez
Represented By: Joseph Egan, Jr.
Represented By: Eric Jacob Lindstrom
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Alfredo Santos
Represented By: Joseph Egan, Jr.
Represented By: Eric Jacob Lindstrom
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Douglas Richey
Represented By: Joseph Egan, Jr.
Represented By: Eric Jacob Lindstrom
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Owl, Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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?