Skip to main content

Su, Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor v. Medical Staffing of America, LLC

E.D. Va.September 11, 2019No. 2:18-cv-00226
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Nature of Suit — the legal category of the dispute
710 Labor: Fair Standards
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Unknown
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
appeal

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Wage Theft

Outcome

The court denied the Secretary of Labor's objection to the magistrate judge's order striking the Secretary's Revised Schedule A, which sought to expand the number of potential beneficiaries in a Fair Labor Standards Act suit from 84 to 389 employees. The court found the revised schedule constituted an amendment requiring court approval and was improperly filed after the Final Pretrial Order.

What This Ruling Means

**What happened:** The U.S. Department of Labor sued Medical Staffing of America, claiming the company violated wage laws affecting its employees. Initially, the Labor Department said 84 workers were affected by potential wage violations. However, during the legal process, the department tried to expand this number dramatically to 389 employees by filing a "Revised Schedule A" - essentially a new list of workers who might be owed money. **What the court decided:** The court sided with Medical Staffing of America and rejected the Labor Department's attempt to add more workers to the case. The judge ruled that expanding the case from 84 to 389 potential beneficiaries was actually a major change that required special court permission. Since the Labor Department filed this expansion improperly and too late in the process (after the final pretrial order), the court struck it down. **Why this matters for workers:** This case shows how important timing and proper procedures are in wage theft lawsuits. When government agencies fight for workers' rights, they must follow strict court rules. Workers should know that even when the Labor Department is on their side, legal technicalities can limit which employees get included in wage recovery cases.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse more:Wage Theft cases

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.