Mbaye v. RCI Hospitality Holdings, Inc.
- Ho
- 1:23-cv-02967
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Mbaye v. RCI Hospitality Holdings, Inc., Judge Ho scheduled a conference on Plaintiffs’ request to compel discovery, without ruling on that request.
The four named Plaintiffs—Elhadji Mbaye, Modou Diop, Tahirou Diakite, and Talla Samb—and the Defendants involved in the proposed Fair Labor Standards Act collective action are affected by the scheduled discovery conference.
What happened
Mbaye v. RCI Hospitality Holdings, Inc. concerns Plaintiffs’ request for additional information and documents in their proposed Fair Labor Standards Act collective action. The four named Plaintiffs say they worked as restroom attendants at three adult nightclubs operated by Defendants and that Defendants’ discovery responses were incomplete.
Plaintiffs asked the court to require Defendants to provide information about the third party involved in contracting restroom attendants, communications with Plaintiffs, covered employees, employer responsibility, and coverage under the federal wage law. Plaintiffs also challenged what they described as boilerplate objections and said Defendants had produced only limited documents and information.
Judge Dale E. Ho did not rule on the request to compel in the provided text. Instead, the court directed the parties to meet with the court on March 15, 2024, at 11:00 a.m. Eastern Time.
The detailed version
- Mbaye v. RCI Hospitality Holdings, Inc. · No. 1:23-cv-02967
- Ho
- Mar. 12, 2024
Nature of the Filing
The provided text is a letter motion from Plaintiffs’ counsel and Judge Ho’s endorsement directing the parties to attend a court conference. Plaintiffs sought an order compelling Defendants to address alleged deficiencies in their January 19, 2024 responses and objections to Plaintiffs’ interrogatories and document requests.
Background
The letter states that Elhadji Mbaye, Modou Diop, Tahirou Diakite, and Talla Samb worked as restroom attendants at Rick’s Cabaret, Hoops Cabaret, and Vivid Cabaret. Plaintiffs bring wage-and-hour claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act and refer to a proposed collective action involving restroom attendants employed at those venues since April 8, 2020. The letter also states that Defendants stipulated to conditional certification of that collective action.
Plaintiffs characterize Defendants’ discovery responses as containing boilerplate objections concerning general objections, privilege, later supplementation, overbreadth, and undue burden. Plaintiffs say Defendants refused to provide substantive responses to many requests and produced nineteen pages of documents, including an arbitration agreement and restroom-attendant agreements. Plaintiffs sought information and documents concerning the alleged third party through whom restroom attendants were contracted, communications with Plaintiffs, covered employees, employer liability, and enterprise coverage under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Court Action
Judge Dale E. Ho directed the parties to meet before the court on March 15, 2024, at 11:00 a.m. The provided text does not state that the court granted or denied the motion to compel, resolve any discovery dispute, decide liability, or rule on the wage-and-hour claims.
Classification Basis
This is a procedural discovery order. The court’s action in the provided text concerns scheduling a court conference about discovery and does not reach the merits of Plaintiffs’ wage-and-hour claims.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.