SONDESKY v. ISR GROUP, INC., 1:14-cv-01077-JDB-egb. (2014)
Court: District Court, W.D. Tennessee
Number: infdco20140718b68
Visitors: 1
Filed: Jun. 18, 2014
Latest Update: Jun. 18, 2014
Summary: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION EDWARD G. BRYANT, Magistrate Judge. On reference for report and recommendation and/or determination is the motion of the Defendant Alfred Lumpkin to stay proceedings [D.E.11]. Relevant History This is a Fair Labor Standards Act lawsuit brought as a collective action by the Plaintiffs. Defendant Lumpkin has answered stating he did not exercise operational control over Co-Defendant ISR Group, and it appears that he has resigned his office and no longer is affiliated w
Summary: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION EDWARD G. BRYANT, Magistrate Judge. On reference for report and recommendation and/or determination is the motion of the Defendant Alfred Lumpkin to stay proceedings [D.E.11]. Relevant History This is a Fair Labor Standards Act lawsuit brought as a collective action by the Plaintiffs. Defendant Lumpkin has answered stating he did not exercise operational control over Co-Defendant ISR Group, and it appears that he has resigned his office and no longer is affiliated wi..
More
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
EDWARD G. BRYANT, Magistrate Judge.
On reference for report and recommendation and/or determination is the motion of the Defendant Alfred Lumpkin to stay proceedings [D.E.11].
Relevant History
This is a Fair Labor Standards Act lawsuit brought as a collective action by the Plaintiffs. Defendant Lumpkin has answered stating he did not exercise operational control over Co-Defendant ISR Group, and it appears that he has resigned his office and no longer is affiliated with ISR. On May 2, 2014, the Defendant ISR filed a suggestion of bankruptcy [D.E.10].1
Consistent with the Local Rules of this Western District of Tennessee, the parties consulted on May 29, 2014, prior to the filing of this motion to stay, and the Plaintiffs voiced opposition. See L.R. 7.2(a)(1)(B). Nonetheless, the Plaintiff has not responded to the motion itself. As such and pursuant to L.R. 7.2 (a)(2), this Court deems this good grounds for granting this motion to stay and thus reports and recommends to the United States District Court to grant this motion to stay.
FootNotes
1. See In re ISR Group, Inc., No. 14-11077-jlc (Bankr. W.D. Tenn. 2014), indicative of a Chapter 11 filing.
Source: Leagle
