- Firm moved for summary judgment on FLSA claim
- Genuine issue whether paralegal covered by statute
A Missouri law firm must face a former paralegal’s allegations that it violated the Fair Labor Standards Act by not paying her overtime for the hours she worked through her lunch break, a federal district court said.
Rutter & Sleeth Law Offices moved for summary judgment on Angel Garrett’s claim, saying she wasn’t covered by the FLSA because she wasn’t involved in any interstate transactions.
Garrett provided a record she kept while working at the firm showing her activities for the year-and-a-half she was there, and claimed she was due 342 hours of overtime.
Garrett also said the firm had clients in California, Maryland, Arizona, and Connecticut, and that she: had recurrent and meaningful contact with out-of-state vendors two or three times a week; dealt with insurance companies located outside Missouri; had regular contact with Medicare and Medicaid; and was in charge of drafting and sending correspondence across state lines.
The firm disputed Garrett’s claims and said that even if she had contact with out-of-state clients or otherwise used the instrumentalities of interstate commerce during her employment, her activities were insufficient to establish FLSA coverage. It also said that Garrett’s work record document was conclusory, self-serving, and lacked specific facts.
There is a genuine issue of material fact about whether Garrett is entitled to individual FLSA coverage, Judge M. Douglas Harpool of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri said Wednesday, denying the firm’s request for summary judgment.
There is also a genuine issue of fact concerning whether Garrett is entitled to overtime, the court said. Her work record is missing six months of her employment, and the firm admitted it didn’t keep time records for her, it said.
HKM Employment Attorneys LLP represented Garrett. Rachel Rutter of Lee’s Summit, Mo., represented the firm.
The case is Garrett v. Rutter & Sleeth Law Offices, W.D. Mo., No. 2:19-cv-04203-MDH, 11/18/20.
To contact the reporter on this story:
To contact the editors responsible for this story:
Learn more about Bloomberg Law or Log In to keep reading:
See Breaking News in Context
Bloomberg Law provides trusted coverage of current events enhanced with legal analysis.
Already a subscriber?
Log in to keep reading or access research tools and resources.
