Posts tagged "1215416"

Tam, et al. v. Federal Management Co., Inc., et al. (Lawyers Weekly No. 12-154-16)

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS SUFFOLK, ss. SUPERIOR COURT CIVIL ACTION No. 2013-2347 BLS 1 SIEW-MEY TAM, on behalf of herself and others similarly situated, and MARY JANE RAYMOND vs. FEDERAL MANAGEMENT CO., INC., RICHARD HENKEN, DAVID FLAD AND PETER LEWIS MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR DECERTIFICATION OF CLASS ACTION On December 16, 2015, this court (Brieger, J.) allowed a motion to certify a class of current and former employees of Federal Management Co., Inc. (“Federal”) alleging the failure of Federal to pay them for overtime hours worked. The class of employees certified was “all current and former Property Managers” employed by Federal from January 1, 2005, to the present.1 The Court carefully reviewed each of the prerequisites for class certification under Mass. R. Civ. P. 23 and found that they were satisfied. Among other findings, the Court concluded that on the pre-discovery record plaintiffs, Siew-Mey Tam and Mary Jane Raymond, were adequate representatives of a class of approximately 40 current or former property 1 Memorandum of Decision and Order on Plaintiffs’ Motion to Certify a Class (“Class Cert Order”). The Class Cert Order did not expressly address the dates inclusive for the putative class. Instead, the court stated that plaintiffs’ motion for class certification is “ALLOWED.” In plaintiffs’ motion for class certification, the time period for the class sought by plaintiffs was “March 1, 2000, to the present.” However, in plaintiffs’ Opposition to the present motion for decertification, plaintiffs assert that the certified class time period is from “January 1, 2005, to the present.” Opposition, p. 2. Accordingly, I adopt plaintiffs’ assertion and find that the presently certified class period is from January 1, 2005 to the present. 1 managers. Defendants took an interlocutory appeal of the class certification order. The Appeals Court affirmed. Following the certification, discovery by both sides ensued, including the depositions of the named plaintiffs. Federal, and the individual defendants, now move to decertify the class based, principally, on the ground that discovery has shown that Tam and Raymond are not adequate class representatives. Defendants also take the opportunity to ask the Court to re-visit all of the other criteria for class certification. For the reasons stated below, the motion will be allowed. BACKGROUND In the Class Cert Order, Judge Brieger noted that the facts of this case are relatively straightforward and undisputed. Federal manages seventeen residential, commercial and retail properties, providing building operations, financial administration, leasing and regulatory compliance services. For each property Federal employs a property manager who may have anywhere from two to seventeen employees reporting to her/him. Raymond was employed by Federal as a property manager from February 1990 to March 2011. Tam was employed by Federal as a property manager […]

Read more...

Posted by Massachusetts Legal Resources - December 5, 2016 at 5:27 pm

Categories: News   Tags: , , , , ,