Jack v. All-Rite Paving Contractors, Inc.
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
- consent decree
- State
- Florida
- Circuit
- Eleventh Circuit
Related Laws
No specific laws identified for this ruling.
Claim Types
Outcome
Court approved settlement of FLSA overtime wage claims. Plaintiff Jack received $12,417.99 and Plaintiff Ware received $19,252.23, with attorney fees of $29,097.15. Case dismissed with prejudice.
What This Ruling Means
Jack v. All-Rite Paving Contractors, Inc. – Case Summary
What Happened
Jack and another worker, Ware, filed a lawsuit against All-Rite Paving Contractors, claiming the company failed to pay them proper overtime wages. Under federal law, employers must pay workers extra money when they work more than 40 hours per week. Jack and Ware alleged the company violated this requirement.
What the Court Decided
A federal court in Florida approved a settlement agreement. Jack received $12,417.99 in back pay, while Ware received $19,252.23. The company also had to pay $29,097.15 in attorney fees to cover the workers' legal costs. The case was dismissed, meaning no further legal action can be taken.
Why This Matters for Workers
This case shows that workers have legal protection against wage theft. If your employer doesn't pay overtime wages you've earned, you can take legal action and potentially recover the money owed plus attorney fees. This ruling reinforces that companies must follow overtime laws or face financial consequences.
This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.
More Rulings in This Case
Other orders and opinions in Jack from the same court.
Similar Rulings
Browse Related
Facing something similar at work?
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.