Kentucky Personal Injury Lawyer Blog

This case is about a woman and her Louisville car accident attorney that file a lawsuit claiming unfair settlement practices and the Court hearing all the evidence decides that more evidence is needed in order for this Court to determine whether or not the Plaintiff actually has a case.

In June of 2010, the United States District Court for the Western District of Kentucky heard a case that involved a woman and her car accident and the bad faith violation (Unfair Claims Settlement Practices Act) she alleged against the Defendant. (See Phelps v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., 2010 WL 2471845 (W.D.Ky.)).

The facts of this Kentucky car accident case are as follows. The Defendant was driving in Louisville when he pulled out from a gas station in front of the Plaintiff causing the Plaintiff’s car to strike his car. Liability is not in question. The Plaintiff was transported to a hospital and was diagnosed with herniated disc requiring surgery. Id. The Louisville car accident was in July of 2003 and Plaintiff’s surgery was on October 15, 2003. Id. Plaintiff submitted her claim to Defendant’s insurance company (State Farm) for her personal injuries and damage to her car. Id. State Farm began to investigate the claim and found in February of 2004 that Plaintiff had a preexisting back problem from a 1999 car accident. Id. After further investigation, Defendant found out that all therapy for the 1999 car accident ended in 1999 and thus decided to make an offer of $25,000 to settle this claim. Id.

Continue reading " Kentucky Car Accident Regarding UCSPA. " »

In August of 2007, the Court of Appeals in Ohio heard a case that involved a car accident where an issue after trial was whether or not the jury’s award was inadequate because the Plaintiff’s car accident lawyer claimed that the awarded damages did not include pain and suffering even though it awarded medical expenses. (See Burris v. Burnworth, 2007 WL 2567720 (Ohio App. 7 Dist.)).

In Burris, the Plaintiff in this car accident case appealed his case because she felt she was entitled to more money. But, this Court reviewing the trial’s court transcript and reading the appellate briefs did not agree. “A jury can refuse to award pain and suffering, even it if does award medical damages, if there is a reason to believe that the plaintiff did not incur those damages.” Id.

Continue reading " Car Accident with Pain and Suffering Issues. " »

In April of 2010, the United States District Court for the Western District of Kentucky heard a case involving a woman and her pregnancy discrimination and Retaliation claims. (See Thompson v. Next Tek Finishing, LLC, 2010 WL 1744621 (W.D.Ky.)). The pregnant Plaintiff alleged that she was terminated after she told her boss that she was pregnant. Plaintiff initially filed in state court but it was then removed up to federal court. Id.

Plaintiff in her Louisville pregnancy discrimination case alleged pregnancy discrimination in violation of the Kentucky Civil Rights Act. Id. “To successfully plead the cause of action, a plaintiff must allege four elements: 1) that she is a member of a protected class (i.e. that she was pregnant), 2) that she suffered an adverse employment action, 3) that she is qualified for the position, and 4) that a similarly situated employee outside her protected classification was not subject to the adverse action.” (cites omitted). Id. Defendant argued that the complaint did not allege that anyone outside the plaintiff’s protected class was treated any better than she was. Id. To this argument the Court did not agree.

Continue reading " Pregnancy Discrimination and Retaliation in Louisville, Kentucky. " »

Recently, in June of 2010, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio heard a case regarding FLSA unpaid overtime wages for a class action. (See Rotuna v. West Customer Management Group, LLC, 2010 WL 2490989 (N.D.Ohio). In Rotuna, the Plaintiff filed his FLSA overtime case and did so on behalf of himself and all other similarly situated making it into a class action case. Plaintiff was employed by Defendant as a customer service representative. Id. Plaintiff alleged that he was required to perform unpaid work before clocking in each day in that he had to boot up his computer (and open numerous software programs) every day before he could clock in and thus felt that he was actually working for Defendant before he technically “clocked-in” and thus was entitled to payment for this time that he was at work. Id. A Kentucky overtime and unpaid wages attorney can review your claim to see if you qualify for such compensation.

Continue reading " FLSA Overtime Case Regarding Clocking In at Work. " »

Recently, in June of 2010, the Court of Appeals of Ohio for the Eighth District heard a case regarding unpaid overtime and nonpayment of wages which the Plaintiff claimed violated the FLSA and Chapter 4111 of the Ohio Revised Code. (See White v. Murtis M. Taylor Multi-Service Center, 2010 WL 23333009 (Ohio App. 8 Dist)). In White, the Plaintiff worked for the Defendant from 2002 to 2004. He filed suit in January of 2008. The trial court in September of 2008 granted the summary judgment motion of the Defendant dismissing the case in that it agreed that Plaintiff was exempt from receiving overtime pay pursuant to both the administrative and the learned professional exemptions. Id. This Court reviewed and reversed the lower court’s rulings. The reasons are as follows.

“The FLSA exempts employees who are “employed in a bona fide executive, administrative, or professional capacity.”” (cites omitted). Id. In order to be exempt under the administrative exemption it must be demonstrated that “1) the employee is compensated at a salary or fee basis at a rate of not less than $455 per week, 2) the employee’s primary duties include the performance of office or non-manual work directly related to the management or general business operations of the employer or the employer’s customers, and 3) the employee’s primary duty includes the exercise of discretion and independent judgment with respect to matters of significance.” (cites omitted). Id.

Continue reading " Overtime Case Regarding Community Support Specialist 1. " »

Recently, in April of 2010, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan heard a case regarding unpaid FLSA overtime and nonpayment of wages for outside plant engineers for a telephone company. (See Wlotkowski v. Michigan Bell Telephone Company, 267 F.R.D. 213 (E.D.MI.)). In Wlotkowski, there were eleven named Plaintiffs. Id. They sued on their behalf and that of others similarly situated. Id. They all held the job title of “manager, Outside Plant Planning Engineering and Design.” This is a class action lawsuit. The Plaintiffs sued claiming they were owed overtime FLSA payments in that Defendant misclassified them as exempt employees. Id.

The case was before the Court on a motion to conditionally certify the proposed class as permitted by the FLSA for purposes of notice and discovery. Id. The Plaintiffs also wanted the names and contact information of those that held the same or similar job within the past 3 years, they wanted this information on a Microsoft Excel format, and they wanted 90 days for the Notice period to have time to send out the notices. The Court agreed to all this and granted Plaintiff’s Motion. The reasoning is as follows.

Continue reading " Overtime Case Regarding Outside Plant Engineers for Telephone Company. " »

Recently, in May of 2010, the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio heard a case regarding unpaid overtime wages for twenty-four Plaintiffs. (See Baden-Winterwood v. Life time Fitness, Inc., 2010 WL 1882261 (S.D.Ohio). In Baden-Winterwood, one Plaintiff, Ms. Seals, had her case remanded to determine whether her overtime case met the salary level test. Id. “Under the salary level test … employees must be paid a minimum of $455 per week or $23,660 per year to qualify for the exemption from overtime pay.” Id. Ms. Seals was only paid $231/week. Id. Based on this fact, Ms. Seals was not an exempt employee and was misclassified as an overtime-exempt employee. Id.

In Ms. Seals’ instance, she did not work overtime, but the Court held, that she was at least entitled to the pay for the hours she worked over the twenty hours per week for which she was not paid. Id. The Court also had to determine the exact amount of time that Plaintiff was entitled to her unpaid wages. An employee is entitled to paid for every hour worked for an employer.

Continue reading " Overtime – Right to Collect Unpaid Wages via FLSA. " »