Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Lima v. MH & WH, LLC

United States District Court, E.D. North Carolina, Western Division

May 30, 2019

MADAY LIMA, Plaintiff,
v.
MH & WH, LLC; HALLE BUILDING GROUP; WENDY A. HOWINGTON; and MICHAEL J. HOWINGTON Defendants.

          ORDER

          LOUISE W. FLANAGAN United States District Judge

         This matter is before the court on plaintiff's motion for reconsideration, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e), (DE 161), of part of the court's March 8, 2019, order regarding the parties' summary judgment motions. Defendants jointly responded in opposition, and plaintiff replied. In this posture the issues raised are ripe for ruling. For the following reasons, plaintiff's motion is denied.[1]

         BACKGROUND

         A detailed background of this case is set forth in the court's March 8, 2019, order. As pertinent herein, in that order, the court allowed multiple claims to proceed to trial, comprising the following:

1) Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) claim for failure to pay proper overtime wages, in violation of 29 U.S.C. § 207, against all defendants (Count One).
2) North Carolina Wage and Hour Act (NCWHA) claim for failure to pay all owned, earned, and promised wages, in violation of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 95-25.6, against all defendants, except for a portion of the claim, which is the subject of the instant motion, wherein plaintiff seeks overtime pay (Count Two).
3) Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. (Title VII) claim for sex discrimination, hostile work environment, constructive discharge, and retaliation, against defendants MH & WH, LLC, and Halle Building Group (“HBG”) (Count Three).
4) Assault, battery, and intentional infliction of emotional distress claims based upon vicarious liability against defendants MH & WH, LLC, and HBG for actions of former defendant Stanley (Counts Four, Five, and Six).
5) Negligent supervision against defendants MH & WH, LLC, and HBG (Count Seven).

         The court granted summary judgment in part in favor of defendants MH & WH, LLC, and HBG, on only that portion of the claim brought by plaintiff under the NCWHA seeking overtime pay, and on one other portion of plaintiff's claims for damages not at issue herein.[2]

         In the instant motion, plaintiff seeks reconsideration of the court's partial grant of summary judgment on that portion of the claim brought by plaintiff under the NCWHA seeking overtime pay.

         COURT'S DISCUSSION

         A. Standard of Review

         Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) allows a party to file a motion to alter or amend a judgment no later than 28 days after its entry. “[T]here are three grounds for amending an earlier judgment: (1) to accommodate an intervening change in controlling law; (2) to account for new evidence not available at trial; or (3) to correct a clear error of law or ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.