WEIL et al v. METAL TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Plaintiff: MELISSA D. FULK and BRIAN A. WEIL
Defendant: METAL TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Case Number: 2:2015cv00016
Filed: January 20, 2015
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
Office: Terre Haute Office
Presiding Judge: Denise K. LaRue
Presiding Judge: Jane Magnus-Stinson
Nature of Suit: Labor: Fair Standards
Cause of Action: 29 U.S.C. ยง 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
November 6, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 445 ENTRY - On May 29, 2019, this matter was remanded from the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. The Seventh Circuit instructed this Court to determine whether the May 1, 2019 amendment to Indiana Code § 22-2-6-2(b) can be applied retroactively to the Plaintiff Class's wage-deduction claims; and, if so, whether this Court's June 13, 2018 determination regarding attorneys' fees and costs should be revised. These issues are fully-briefed by the parties and are ripe for the Court's decision. The judgment in this case is amended as follows to reflect that Metal Technologies shall pay: $93,152.58 to the Plaintiff Class, from which shall be paid a $2,500 incentive award to lead Plaintiff Melissa Fulk; &# 036;194.61 to Mr. Weil; $128.97 to Ms. Fulk; and $106,810.72 as reasonable attorneys' fees. The Court declines to award costs to either party. An Amended Final Judgment shall issue accordingly. (See Entry.). Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 11/6/2019.(RSF)
June 13, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 415 ORDER - For the reasons described above, the Court: GRANTS Plaintiffs' Motion for Incentive/Service Awards, 396 , to the extent that it grants Ms. Fulk an incentive award in the amount of $2,500. The Motion is in all other respects DENI ED; GRANTS IN PART Plaintiffs' Motion for Attorneys' Fees and AWARDS Plaintiffs $116,098.61 as a reasonable attorneys' fee, 398 ; and DENIES the parties' petitions for costs, [ 397 ; 400 ]. Each party shall bear its own costs.Final Judgment shall issue by separate order (SEE ORDER FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION). Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 6/13/2018.(DW)
March 30, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 395 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - The Court conducted a bench trial in this action on January 30, 2018. Plaintiffs Brian Weil and Melissa Fulk (collectively "Plaintiffs") were present in person and by counsel Robert Kondras. Defe ndant Metal Technologies, Inc. ("Metal Technologies") was present by counsel Michael Padgett and Melissa Taft. For the reasons detailed above, the Court concludes that Metal Technologies is liable to the Plaintiff class, Ms. Fulk, and Mr . Weil to the extent indicated by the Court's order. The amount of Metal Technologies' liability to the class and the plaintiffs is as follows: The Court awards the Plaintiff class $93,152.58 in damages arising from the improper ded uction of wages for clothing rental taken between January 20, 2013 and April 10, 2016. The Court awards the Plaintiff class $8,102.04 in damages arising from the improper deduction of wages for clothing rental taken from April 11, 2016 forwa rd. The Court awards Mr. Weil $129.30 in damages arising from the improper deduction of wages for clothing rental. The Court awards Mr. Weil $63.00 in damages arising from the improper "OF" deduction. The Court awards Ms. Fulk $128.97 in damages resulting from Metal Technologies' failure to pay wages earned, in violation of the FLSA and IWPS. The Court awards Mr. Weil $2.31 in damages resulting from Metal Technologies' failure to pay wages earned, in violation of the IWCA. Plaintiffs' counsel is ORDERED to file with the Court his petition for attorney's fees and a bill of costs, as well as any request for an incentive award, within fourteen (14) days of the issuance of this order. Final judgment shall issue after the fees and costs are resolved. (SEE ORDER). Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 3/30/2018.(APD)
May 26, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 363 ORDER - For the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS IN PART AND DENIES IN PART Plaintiffs' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment 321 : The Court GRANTS Plaintiffs' Motion as to liability on Plaintiffs' wage deduction claim under th e IWPA, but only as to the period from January 20, 2013 through April 10, 2016.The Court DENIES Plaintiffs' Motion as to liability for the remainder of the claim period.The Court DENIES Plaintiffs' Motion as to liability on Plaintiffs' time-rounding claims under the FLSA and IWPA.The Court GRANTS Metal Technologies' Motion to Decertify 332 , and DENIES AS MOOT Metal Technologies' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment 330 (SEE ORDER FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION). Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 5/26/2017. (DW)
January 25, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 79 ORDER - The Court GRANTS IN PART AND DENIES IN PART Plaintiffs' 53 Motion to Certify a Combined Class Action and DENIES Metal Technologies' 75 Motion to Leave to File Surreply. Moreover, the Court DESIGNATES Brian A. Weil and Meli ssa D. Fulk as representatives for the FLSA collective action, and DESIGNATES Melissa D. Fulk as representative for the class action pursuant to Rule 23. The Court further DESIGNATES Robert P. Kondras, Jr. of Hunt, Hassler & Lorenz LLP as lead class counsel pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 (g). The Court DENIES AS MOOT Plaintiffs' 55 Motion for Approval of Proposed Notice of Class Action and FLSA Collective Action. The Court further GRANTS Plaintiffs 78 Motion for Pre-trial Con ference, and asks the magistrate judge to conduct such conference to work with the parties to develop both a further scheduling order and the form of appropriate notice to the classes in light of the foregoing ruling. (See Order.) Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 1/25/2016. (GSO)
October 6, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 67 ORDER - Presently pending before the Court in this action brought under the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), the Indiana Wage Payment Statute, and the Indiana Wage Claims Statute is Plaintiffs Brian A. Weil's and Melissa D. Fulk&# 039;s (collectively the "Plaintiffs") Motion to Equitably Toll the Statute of Limitations for Putative Collective Action Members (the "Motion"). [Filing No. 41.] For the following reasons, the Court denies Plaintiffs' Motion without prejudice. (See Order.) Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 10/6/2015. (RSF)
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 Indiana Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: WEIL et al v. METAL TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: MELISSA D. FULK
Represented By: Robert Peter Kondras, Jr.
Represented By: Jacob H. Miller
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: BRIAN A. WEIL
Represented By: Robert Peter Kondras, Jr.
Represented By: Jacob H. Miller
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: METAL TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Represented By: Brian D. Burbrink
Represented By: Todd J. Kaiser
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?