United States District Court, W.D. Arkansas, Fayetteville Division
DAVID BROWNE; ANTONIO CALDWELL; and LUCRETIA HALL, on behalf of themselves and all those similarly situated PLAINTIFFS
P.A.M. TRANSPORT, INC. DEFENDANT
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
TIMOTHY L. BROOKS, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
before the Court are:
• Defendant P.A.M. Transport Inc.'s
("PAM") Motion for Partial Dismissal and Brief in
Support (Doc. 55); Plaintiffs David Browne's, Antonio
Caldwell's, and Lucretia Hall's (collectively,
"Plaintiffs") Memorandum of Law in Opposition (Doc.
67); and PAM's Reply Brief in Support (Doc. 77); and
• PAM's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (Doc.
56) and Brief in Support (Doc. 57); Plaintiffs'
Memorandum of Law in Opposition (Doc. 68); and PAM's
Reply Brief in Support (Doc. 76).
reasons given below, both Motions are
are individuals who worked for PAM as truck drivers. They
have asserted a variety of claims against PAM in this case
for alleged violations of the federal Fair Labor Standards
Act ("FLSA") and the Arkansas Minimum Wage Law
("AMWL"). See Doc. 7. Plaintiffs brought
their claims as a putative collective action under the FMLA
and a putative class action under Fed.R.Civ.P. 23. See
Id. On May 8, 2017, this Court conditionally certified
the collective action, see Doc. 19, and roughly
three thousand individuals subsequently opted in as
collective-action plaintiffs, see generally Docs.
21-39, 42-46. November 2, 2018 is the deadline for PAM to
move for decertification of the collective action and for
Plaintiffs to move for class certification under Rule 23.
See Doc. 81.
24, 2018, PAM filed a Motion for Partial Dismissal under
Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(c). See Doc. 55. In that Motion, PAM
seeks dismissal of all Plaintiffs' "sleeper
berth" claims (which will be explained further below),
and of the Arkansas state law claims brought by Plaintiffs
Browne and Hall. The following day, PAM filed a Motion for
Judgment on the Pleadings under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(c).
See Doc. 56. In that Motion, PAM seeks dismissal of
all claims by Plaintiff Caldwell along with 54 additional
opt-in plaintiffs. Both of these motions have been fully
briefed and await decision from this Court. The Court will
address them both below, after reciting the applicable legal
mentioned above, both Motions are brought under Fed.R.Civ.P.
12(c). Although one is styled a "motion to dismiss"
and the other is styled a "motion for judgment on the
pleadings," the same legal standard applies to both.
Specifically, motions for judgment on the pleadings under
Rule 12(c) are governed by the same standard that governs
Rule 12(b)(6) motions to dismiss. See Westcott v. City of
Omaha, 901 F.2d 1486, 1488 (8th Cir. 1990). To survive
such a motion, a complaint must provide "a short and
plain statement of the claim that [the plaintiff] is entitled
to relief." Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2). The purpose of this
requirement is to "give the defendant fair notice of
what the .. . claim is and the grounds upon which it
rests." Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 93
(2007) (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S.
544, 555 (2007)). The Court must accept all of a
complaint's factual allegations as true, and construe
them in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, drawing
all reasonable inferences in the plaintiff's favor.
See Ashley Cnty., Ark. v. Pfizer, Inc., 552 F.3d
659, 665 (8th Cir. 2009).
the complaint "must contain sufficient factual matter,
accepted as true, to 'state a claim to relief that is
plausible on its face.'" Ashcroft v. Iqbal,
556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S.
at 570). "A claim has facial plausibility when the
plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to
draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable
for the misconduct alleged." Id. "A
pleading that offers 'labels and conclusions' or
'a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of
action will not do.' Nor does a complaint suffice if it
tenders 'naked assertion[s]' devoid of 'further
factual enhancement.'" Id. In other words,
while "the pleading standard that Rule 8 announces does
not require 'detailed factual allegations, '... it
demands more than an unadorned, the
defendant-unlawfully-harmed-me accusation." Id.
the Court will first discuss PAM's May 24 Motion for
Partial Dismissal. Then the Court will take up PAM's May
25 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings.
PAM's May 24 Motion for Partial ...