Mercado v. Metropolitan Transportation Authority
- Analisa Torres
- 1:20-cv-06533
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Mercado v. Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Judge Torres denied defendants’ request to pause briefing on conditional Fair Labor Standards Act class certification.
The order directly affected the Metropolitan Transportation Authority and the Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority, whose request to pause briefing was denied, and the plaintiffs, whose briefing on conditional certification was not stayed. It also concerned potential members of the proposed Fair Labor Standards Act collective action because the plaintiffs said a delay could postpone notice to them.
What happened
In Mercado v. Metropolitan Transportation Authority, the plaintiffs sought conditional certification of a group under the Fair Labor Standards Act, which would allow notice to potential group members.
The defendants asked the court to pause briefing on that request until the court decided whether to combine this case with another case. The plaintiffs opposed a pause, arguing that it would delay notice to potential group members.
Judge Torres denied the defendants’ request to pause briefing, finding that they had not given a persuasive reason to delay deciding conditional certification.
The detailed version
- Mercado v. Metropolitan Transportation Authority · No. 1:20-cv-06533
- Analisa Torres
- Sept. 30, 2020
Background
Jeffrey Mercado, Tyrone Pringle, Adam Roman, Kevin Knois, and Edward Kalanz sued the Metropolitan Transportation Authority and the Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated. The plaintiffs filed a motion for conditional class certification under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Conditional certification would allow the plaintiffs to notify potential members of the proposed collective action and would facilitate discovery.
The Motion
The defendants moved to stay, or pause, briefing on the plaintiffs’ conditional-certification motion. They asked the court to wait until it decided their motion to consolidate this case with another case, No. 20 Civ. 5776. The plaintiffs opposed the requested pause, arguing that delaying conditional certification would delay notice to potential class members.
Ruling
The court held that the defendants had not presented a persuasive reason to delay deciding the conditional-certification issue until after the court ruled on consolidation. The court therefore denied the defendants’ request to stay briefing. Judge Analisa Torres did not decide the conditional-certification motion or the underlying claims in this order.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.