Ortiz v. Eskina 214 Corp.
- Andrew Carter
- 1:21-cv-01537
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 5
Ortiz v. Eskina 214 Corp.: Judge Parker scheduled a discovery conference but did not decide the plaintiffs’ requests for class information and records.
The plaintiffs, the defendants, and potential participants in the conditionally approved wage-related collective action and proposed class.
What happened
In Ortiz v. Eskina 214 Corp., the plaintiffs said the defendants had provided only employee names and payroll information for 2019, despite earlier orders concerning information and records for covered non-managerial employees. The plaintiffs said they needed the information to notify potential participants and pursue their wage claims as a collective and class action.
The plaintiffs asked the court to require the defendants to provide additional employee contact information and wage-related records, including records from years before and after 2019. They also asked the court to resolve the discovery dispute or hold a conference.
The court scheduled a discovery conference for June 6, 2022, but the order did not decide whether to require the requested discovery. The order was signed by Judge Katharine H. Parker.
The detailed version
- Ortiz v. Eskina 214 Corp. · No. 1:21-cv-01537
- Andrew Carter
- May 13, 2022
Background
The plaintiffs’ lawyers submitted a letter about a discovery dispute in this wage-and-hour class and collective action. The letter referred to an earlier order conditionally approving a collective action for non-managerial employees employed by the defendants at any time from February 19, 2018, through the present. That earlier order required the defendants to produce employee names, titles, employment dates, last known mailing addresses, email addresses, and telephone numbers.
The plaintiffs said the defendants produced a list containing only names on April 21, 2022. According to the plaintiffs, the defendants took the position that they had produced all the information they possessed and would not supplement the list. The plaintiffs said the missing information prevented them from sending notices to potential participants and contacting people who might join the collective action.
The plaintiffs also said the court had ordered production of relevant wage records by June 3, 2022, but that the defendants had produced payroll details only for 2019. The plaintiffs claimed the defendants would not provide additional records for years before or after 2019. They sought class-related information and documents, including time records, wage notices, wage statements, annual wage summaries, tip records, and any employee handbook. They argued that the discovery was relevant and proportional to their proposed class and collective claims and needed for a future class-certification motion.
Requested relief and court action
The plaintiffs asked the court to compel the requested discovery or hold a conference to resolve the parties’ dispute. The order did not grant or deny that request. Instead, it scheduled a discovery conference for Monday, June 6, 2022, at 2:30 p.m. in Courtroom 17-D of the United States Courthouse at 500 Pearl Street, New York, New York.
Result
This document resolved a scheduling and discovery matter only; it did not decide the merits of the plaintiffs’ wage claims or whether a class would ultimately be certified. The order was signed by Judge Katharine H. Parker.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.