No specific laws identified for this ruling.
Parties settled FLSA collective action for $100,000 total. Settlement class (15 plaintiffs) received $56,350 in back pay and liquidated damages; plaintiffs' counsel received $40,650 in fees and costs; named plaintiff received $3,000 service award. Fourteen opt-in plaintiffs dismissed without prejudice due to different overtime calculation methodology.
Lupardus v. Elk Energy Services, LLC — Plain English Summary
What Happened
Employees at Elk Energy Services claimed the company failed to pay them wages they were legally owed under federal wage laws. Fifteen workers joined together in a lawsuit alleging wage theft—specifically that the company did not properly pay overtime compensation.
What the Court Decided
The case was settled rather than decided at trial. The company agreed to pay $100,000 to resolve the dispute. The settlement money was divided as follows: the 15 workers received $56,350 in back pay and additional damages, the workers' lawyers received $40,650 for their legal fees and costs, and the main plaintiff received a $3,000 award for representing the group. Fourteen additional employees who had joined the lawsuit were dismissed because they had different overtime payment situations that required separate handling.
Why This Matters for Workers
This case shows that employees can successfully challenge wage theft through group lawsuits. When companies don't pay proper wages, workers can band together to recover what they're owed. Even settlements demonstrate that companies may face significant financial consequences for failing to compensate employees correctly.
This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.
Other orders and opinions in Lupardus from the same court.
Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 3 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.