Davis v. Omnicare, Inc. et al
Plaintiff: Daniel Davis
Defendant: Omnicare, Inc., Home Care Pharmacy, LLC, D&R Pharmaceutical Services, LLC and Three Forks Apothecary, LLC
Case Number: 5:2018cv00142
Filed: February 19, 2018
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky
Office: Lexington Office
County: Jessamine
Presiding Judge: Karen K. Caldwell
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
September 14, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 139 JUDGMENT: Consistent with the Opinion & Order entered today, and pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58, the Court: 1. GRANTS DE 133 ; 2. DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE Plaintiff's complaint (DE 1 ) and all claims in that pleading, per t he Opinion & Order and Settlement Agreement; and, 3. STRIKES this matter from the Court's active docket, although the Court will retain jurisdiction for the purposes of enforcing the terms of the parties' approved Settlement Agreement. Signed by Judge Robert E. Wier on 9/14/21.(JLM)cc: COR
March 30, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 129 MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: 1. Preliminary Certification of Rule 23 Class as defined in proposed Settlement Agreement is GRANTED; 2. FLSA collection CONDITIONALLY CERTIFIED; 3. request to preliminary appoint Plaintiff Daniel Davis is GRANTED; 4. Pla intiff's counsel are PRELIMINARY APPOINTED as Class Counsel; 5. appointment KY Legal Aid as cy pres beneficiary is PRELIMINARILY APPROVED; 6. request for attorneys fees and expenses is GRANTED; 7. This terminates by GRANT DE 127 & [128 ]; 8. request for approval of Proposed Notice to the Settlement Class Members, and the proposed schedule and procedure for the final approval is GRANTED, though on the stated terms, which require noted conforming corrections and modifications to the draft notice. Signed by Judge Robert E. Wier on 3/30/2021. (SKV) cc: COR
December 3, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 92 OPINION & ORDER: 1. Court GRANTS 51 Motion for Conditional Certification, IN PART and CONDITIONALLY CERTIFIES a collective defined as: All current and former delivery drivers based at a distr. center located in Ashland, Beattyville or Lexington, Ke ntucky, and received their paycheck on or after 12/3/16; 2. Pltf SHALL provide defense a proposed list of notice recipients w/in 7 DAYS. Dfts SHALL advise Pltf of specific objections w/in 4 DAYS of receipt; 3. Parties SHALL file either a joint status report attaching an agreed list of notice recipients, or separate reports if parties are unable to agree w/in 14 DAYS of Order; 4. Pltf SHALL provide defense a proposed form w/in 7 DAYS. Dfts SHALL review form and advise Pltf of specific objections w/in 4 DAYS of receipt; 5. Parties SHALL file either a joint status report attaching an agreed proposed opt-in form, or separate reports if parties are unable to agree w/in 14 days of Order; 6. Pltf SHALL file a Proposed Notice w/in 7 DAYS. Dft SHALL file either a notice of non-opposition, or objections w/in 4 days of such filing; 7. The Court provisionally AUTHORIZES notice to the conditionally certified collective approved in this Order. However, the Court withholds final approval. Signed by Judge Robert E. Wier on 12/3/2019.(SLH)cc: COR
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 Kentucky Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Davis v. Omnicare, Inc. et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Daniel Davis
Represented By: Michele D. Henry
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: Omnicare, Inc.
Represented By: J. Stanton Hill
Represented By: Andrew M. McKinley
Represented By: Nancy E. Rafuse
Represented By: James Joseph Swartz, Jr.
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: Home Care Pharmacy, LLC
Represented By: J. Stanton Hill
Represented By: Andrew M. McKinley
Represented By: Nancy E. Rafuse
Represented By: James Joseph Swartz, Jr.
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: D&R Pharmaceutical Services, LLC
Represented By: J. Stanton Hill
Represented By: Andrew M. McKinley
Represented By: Nancy E. Rafuse
Represented By: James Joseph Swartz, Jr.
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: Three Forks Apothecary, LLC
Represented By: Michele D. Henry
Represented By: J. Stanton Hill
Represented By: Andrew M. McKinley
Represented By: Nancy E. Rafuse
Represented By: James Joseph Swartz, Jr.
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?