Skip to main content

Murray v. United States Attorney's Office

W.D. Wash.April 8, 2025No. 2:25-cv-00259
Plaintiff WinParamount Heating & Air Conditioning, LLC$43,946 awarded
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Nature of Suit — the legal category of the dispute
Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Other
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Unknown
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
jury verdict

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Wage Theft

Outcome

Jury found employer willfully failed to pay overtime wages; plaintiff awarded $43,946 in damages plus attorney's fees and costs. Court granted in part plaintiff's post-trial motion for attorney's fees and other relief.

What This Ruling Means

**Worker Wins $43,946 in Overtime Pay Case** This case involved a worker who sued Paramount Heating & Air Conditioning, LLC for not paying required overtime wages. The employee claimed the company failed to properly compensate them for hours worked beyond the standard 40-hour work week, which is a violation of federal wage laws. A jury ruled in favor of the worker, finding that the heating and air conditioning company deliberately failed to pay the overtime wages that were legally owed. The court awarded the employee $43,946 in damages to cover the unpaid overtime. The company was also ordered to pay the worker's attorney's fees and court costs on top of the damage award. This ruling is significant for workers because it demonstrates that courts will hold employers accountable when they intentionally withhold overtime pay. The fact that the jury found the violation was "willful" – meaning deliberate rather than accidental – likely contributed to the substantial award. For employees in similar situations, this case shows that pursuing legal action for unpaid overtime can result in meaningful compensation, including recovery of attorney's fees, which makes it more feasible for workers to seek justice when their wages are stolen.

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.