Filed: Apr. 20, 2019
Latest Update: Apr. 20, 2019
Summary: JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ON ALL COUNTS PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ENTRY OF ORDER OF JUDGMENT FOR PLAINTIFF AND RELATED RELIEF OF DETERMINATION OF REASONABLE ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS HARRY D. LEINENWEBER , District Judge . COMES NOW Plaintiff, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, by and through her attorney John Ireland, and Motions this Court for Entry of Judgment for the Plaintiff and Against all Defendants and for related relief of determination of Fees and Cost via Local Rule
Summary: JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ON ALL COUNTS PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ENTRY OF ORDER OF JUDGMENT FOR PLAINTIFF AND RELATED RELIEF OF DETERMINATION OF REASONABLE ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS HARRY D. LEINENWEBER , District Judge . COMES NOW Plaintiff, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, by and through her attorney John Ireland, and Motions this Court for Entry of Judgment for the Plaintiff and Against all Defendants and for related relief of determination of Fees and Cost via Local Rule ..
More
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ON ALL COUNTS
PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ENTRY OF ORDER OF JUDGMENT FOR PLAINTIFF AND RELATED RELIEF OF DETERMINATION OF REASONABLE ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS
HARRY D. LEINENWEBER, District Judge.
COMES NOW Plaintiff, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, by and through her attorney John Ireland, and Motions this Court for Entry of Judgment for the Plaintiff and Against all Defendants and for related relief of determination of Fees and Cost via Local Rule 54 and for briefing on determination of reasonable Attorney Fees and Costs, In Support of this Motion, Plaintiff states in support the following:
1. Plaintiff brought this individual, Class and Collective action to challenge Defendants' violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") and the Illinois Minimum Wage Law ("IMWL"). This case is filed to recover unpaid wages for overtime and/or minimum wages owed for work performed for which Plaintiff was not compensated. (See Plaintiff's Complaint; Docket Document # 1).
2. Plaintiff also claimed her last paycheck for over fifty hours of work time was unpaid in violation of numerous wage laws. (Id).
3. Defendants filed an Answer and denied nearly every fact, including the last check claim.
4. Subsequently Defendants admitted, via Interrogatory Answer, that Plaintiff's last check was not paid, but blamed Plaintiff for somehow causing Defendants failure to pay her earned wages.
5. Plaintiff also sought, via FLSA Collective Motion, to have other similarly situated employees also paid wages deprived by Defendants illegal wage schemes. (See Docket Document #6), however, the court did not rule upon that Motion.
6. After pursuing discovery and the Collective Action with vigor, the Defendants have admitted that Plaintiff was Just and Right in her claims and have made an Offer of Judgment. (see Defendants Offer of Judgment, attached to this Motion as Exhibit 1).
7. Within the required fourteen days period that the Offer of Judgment was available, Plaintiff accepted that Offer and filed the Offer and Acceptance on the Docket. (See Plaintiff's Acceptance of the Offer of Judgment, attached to this motion as Exhibit 2; see also Docket Document # 29).
8. Plaintiff Now Motions this Court for Entry of an Order, finding Judgment for the Plaintiff and against all of the Defendants.
9. Additionally, as the Defendants Offer of Judgment included an Offer for determination of the reasonable Attorney Fees and Costs by the court, (see Ex. 1), Plaintiff also asks the court to allow for that determination.
10. Plaintiff has filed, in conjunction with this Motion and the Acceptance of the Offer of Judgment, a short Motion for Fees and Costs with some supporting materials. However, Plaintiff's short Motion is provided pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54, which requires a filing of a Fee Petition within fourteen (14) days via motion1.
11. However Rule 54 allows for later submission of related Evidence, Memorandum, Affidavits in Support and other evidence. The timing of that later evidentiary submissions is not specified in the Federal Rules.
12. Additionally, the Local Rules of this Court also detail procedures for submission and determination of Attorney Fee Petitions.
13. Local Rule 54 reads (in part):
(b) Time to File. Either before or after the entry of judgment the court may enter an order with respect to the filing of a fee motion pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 54. Unless the court's order includes a different schedule for such filing, the motion shall be filed in accordance with the provisions of this rule and shall be filed and served no later than 91 days after the entry of the judgment or settlement agreement on which the motion is founded. If the court has not entered such an order before a motion has been filed pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(d)(2)(B), then after such filing the court may order the parties to comply with the procedure set out in this rule as a post-filing rather than as a pre-filing procedure.
14. Thus here the Court may enter an Order instituting this Fee Petition procedure, and the rule allowing for procedures under Local rule 54, after the Order is entered the rules are Mandated, in that the parties shall follow local rule rules for Fee petitions.
15. Plaintiff asks the Court to Enter that Order, and allow for the application of Local Rule 54, as it allows for full determination and adjudication of Fees. For example, Local Rule allows Plaintiff to have access to the Defendants' Fee payments and time-records, to allow for consideration of reasonableness of the Plaintiff's fees, compared in part to the Defendants Fee payments.
Wherefore for these reasons, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Court:
a) Enter Judgment for the Plaintiff Angelica Mitchell and Against Electric Beach Tanning Salon Ltd.,
b) Enter Judgment for the Plaintiff Angelica Mitchell and Against V F V Inc.,
c) Enter Judgment for the Plaintiff Angelica Mitchell and Against Ultramax Industries, Inc
d) Enter Judgment for the Plaintiff Angelica Mitchell and Against MICHAEL A VOJACK
e) Enter an Order allowing for application of Local Rule 54 for determination and briefing on Plaintiff's Fees and Costs.
f) Other Relief that is Just and Right.
Respectfully submitted,
/S/ John C. Ireland
Dated April 20, 2019
John C. Ireland
The Law Office of John C. Ireland
636 Spruce Street
South Elgin ILL 60177
630-464-9675 Fax 630-206-0889
attorneyireland@gmail.com
IN THE UNITED DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION
Angelica Mitchell,
individually
and on behalf of all persons
similarly situated CASE NO 18 CV 7475
as class representative under
Illinois Law and/or as
members of the Collective as permitted
under the Fair Labor Standards Act;
Honorable Harry D. Leinenweber
Plaintiff,
vs.
Electric Beach Tanning Salon Ltd.,
V F V Inc., Ultramax Industries, Inc and
MICHAEL A VOJACK as an individual
under the FLSA and Illinois Wage Laws
Defendants.
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ON ALL COUNTS
PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ENTRY OF ORDER OF JUDGEMENT FOR PLAINTIFF AND RELATED RELIEF FOR BRIEFING ON DETERMINATION OF REASONABLE ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS
EXHIBIT 1
DEFENDANTS' OFFER OF JUDGMENT
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION
ANGELICA MITCHELL, individually and on
behalf of all persons similarly situated as class
representative under Illinois Law and/or as
members of the Collective as permitted under
the Fair Labor Standards Act,
Plaintiff,
Case No. 18-cv-7475
v.
Honorable Harry D. Leinenweber
ELECTRIC BEACH TANNING SALON LTD.,
V F V INC., ULTRAMAX INDUSTRIES, INC.
and MICHAEL A VOJACK as an individual
under the FLSA and Illinois Wage Laws,
Defendants.
DEFENDANTS RULE 68 OFFER OF JUDGMENT
Defendants, ELECTRIC BEACH TANNING SALON LTD., V F V INC., ULTRAMAX INDUSTRIES, INC. (the "Corporate Defendants") and MICHAEL A VOJACK (collectively, the "Defendants") by their attorneys, Laura A. Balson and M. Elysia Baker of Golan Christie Taglia LLP, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 68, hereby offer to allow judgment to be entered in favor of Plaintiff, ANGELICA MITCHELL ("Mitchell"), individually, and against the Defendants in the amount of $11,400.00 for statutory damages and $5,000 for reasonable attorneys' fees, costs and expenses of the suit now accrued. The offer extended herein is intended to fully satisfy and represent complete relief for Mitchell's individual claims, but to the extent the offer extended does not do so, Defendants hereby offer to provide Mitchell with any other relief which is determined by the Court to be necessary to fully satisfy all of the individual claims of Mitchell in this action. Mitchell's request for injunctive relief is moot because the Corporate Defendants have been sold and no longer have non-exempt employees.
This offer of judgment is made for the purposes specified in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 68 and is not to be construed as either an admission that the Defendants are liable in this action, or that Mitchell has suffered any damage. This offer of judgment is intended to resolve all of Mitchell's claims in this action, including without limitation any and all claims for compensatory damages, liquidated damages, statutory damages, punitive damages, attorneys' fees, litigation expenses and costs of suit. After entry of judgment, the instant action is to be dismissed.
This offer of judgment shall not be filed with the Court unless (a) written notice accepting the offer is served within 14 days or (b) in a proceeding to determine costs.
Dated: April 8, 2019 Respectfully submitted,
ELECTRIC BEACH TANNING SALON LTD., V
F V INC., ULTRAMAX INDUSTRIES, INC. and
MICHAEL A VOJACK
By:
One of Their Attorneys
Laura A. Balson, Esq. (ARDC# 6291377)
M. Elysia Baker, Esq. (ARDC# 6308530)
GOLAN CHRISTIE TAGLIA LLP
70 West Madison Street, Suite 1500
Chicago, Illinois 60602
(312) 263-2300
labalson@gct.law
mebaker@gctlaw
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned, a non-attorney, hereby certifies that she caused a copy of Defendants Rule 68 Offer of Judgment to be served upon the following by electronic mail and U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, on this 8th day of April, 2019 addressed as follows:
John Craig Ireland
The Law Firm of John C. Ireland
636 Spruce Street
South Elgin, IL 60177
atty4employeesaaol.com
Jasmin Mould
IN THE UNITED DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION
Angelica Mitchell,
individually
and on behalf of all persons
similarly situated CASE NO 18 CV 7475
as class representative under
Illinois Law and/or as
members of the Collective as permitted
under the Fair Labor Standards Act;
Honorable Harry D. Leinenweber
Plaintiff,
vs.
Electric Beach Tanning Salon Ltd.,
V F V Inc., Ultramax Industries, Inc and
MICHAEL A VOJACK as an individual
under the FLSA and Illinois Wage Laws
Defendants.
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ON ALL COUNTS
PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ENTRY OF ORDER OF JUDGEMENT FOR PLAINTIFF AND RELATED RELIEF FOR BRIEFING ON DETERMINATION OF REASONABLE ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS
EXHIBIT 2
PLAINTIFF'S ACCEPTANCE OF DEFENDANTS' OFFER OF JUDGMENT
THE LAW OFFICE OF JOHN C. IRELAND
636 Spruce Street
South Elgin ILL
60177
(630) 464-9675
Facsimile 630-206-0889
Atty4employees@aol.com
Attorneyireland@gmail.com
Via email April 20, 2019
Laura A. Balson Golan Christie Taglia LLP 70 W. Madison Chicago IL
Re: Acceptance of Offer of Judgment
Angelica Mitchell V. Electric Beach Tanning Salon Ltd., V F V Inc., Ultramax Industries, Inc and MICHAEL A VOJACK
Federal Case Number 18 CV 7475
Dear Counsel:
I am in receipt of Defendants Offer of Judgment, and Plaintiff Accepts the offer to pay her $11,400.00 and pay her reasonable Attorney Fees and Costs as offered in the terms of that Offer.
Thank you for your time and consideration of this issue.
Sincerely yours;
John C. Ireland
