United States District Court, D. Maine
DECISION AND ORDER
E. Walker United States District Judge.
action, Plaintiff Timothy Noll alleges that Defendants
Flowers Foods, LePage Bakeries, and CK Sales Company
misclassify Maine-based product distributors as independent
contractors, and that Maine and federal law require that he
and other distributors be compensated as employees. Now
pending are Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification
(ECF No. 191) and Defendants' Motion for Decertification
of the Conditionally Certified Collective Action (ECF No.
parties' briefs set forth the salient factual background
and I discern no material factual dispute that requires
resolution in order to rule on the pending motions. For
reasons outlined below, Plaintiff's motion is granted and
Defendants' motion is denied.
requests certification of a class of plaintiffs to pursue
claims for employee misclassification (Count II - declaratory
judgment of misclassification); violation of Maine's
independent contractor law, 26 M.R.S. §§
1043(11)(E) and 591-A (Count III); violation of Maine's
employment practices laws, 26 M.R.S. §§ 621 and 661
(Count IV); and contract recission and quantum meruit (Count
V). Through these claims Plaintiffs seek injunctive relief as
well as damages for unpaid overtime and unlawful paycheck
deductions. Plaintiff proposes the following class:
All persons who, at any time from December 2, 2012 continuing
through entry of judgment in this case, worked as
distributors for Flowers Foods, Inc., Lepage Bakeries, Inc.,
and/or CK Sales Co., LLC, in the State of Maine and were
classified as independent contractors under their
(Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification at 8, ECF No.
must demonstrate that the class and claims satisfy the four
prerequisites of Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(a), and that the proposed
class action would be a type of class action condoned under
Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(b). For reasons set forth below, I find that
Plaintiff has satisfied the requirements and, therefore, I
will certify the class.
Rule 23(a) Prerequisites
to Rule 23(a):
One or more members of a class may sue ... as representative
parties on behalf of all members only if:
(1) the class is so numerous that joinder of all members is
(2) there are questions of law or fact common to the class;
(3) the claims or defenses of the representative parties are
typical of the claims or defenses of the class; and
(4) the representative parties will fairly and adequately
protect the interests of the class.
proposed class consists of approximately 102 individuals.
Although Defendant argues that Plaintiff has not demonstrated
that joinder would be impracticable, I conclude that the size
of the class meets the numerosity requirement. Scovil ...