From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Paschal v. Perry's Rests.

United States District Court, W.D. Texas, Austin Division
May 16, 2023
1:22-CV-27-RP (W.D. Tex. May. 16, 2023)

Opinion

1:22-CV-27-RP

05-16-2023

CANDICE PASCHAL and PEDRO ZARAZUA JR., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. PERRY'S RESTAURANTS, LTD. d/b/a PERRY'S STEAKHOUSE AND GRILLE and CHRISTOPHER PERRY, Defendants.


ORDER

ROBERT PITMAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Before the Court is the report and recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Susan Hightower concerning Plaintiffs Candice Paschal and Pedro Zarazua's (“Plaintiffs”) Motion to Certify Class, (Dkt. 50). In her report and recommendation, Judge Hightower recommends that the Court deny the motion. (R. & R., Dkt. 78). Defendants Christopher Perry and Perry's Restaurants' (together, “Perry's”) timely filed objections to the report and recommendation, (Objs., Dkt. 80), Plaintiffs filed a response, (Resp., Dkt. 81), and Perry's filed a reply, (Dkt. 85).

A party may serve and file specific, written objections to a magistrate judge's findings and recommendations within fourteen days after being served with a copy of the report and recommendation and, in doing so, secure de novo review by the district court. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). Because Perry's timely objected to the report and recommendation, the Court reviews the report and recommendation de novo. Having done so, and having considered the parties' respective responsive filings, the Court overrules Perry's objections and adopts the report and recommendation as its own order.

Accordingly, the Court ORDERS that the report and recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Susan Hightower, (Dkt. 78), is ADOPTED. Plaintiffs' motion to certify the class, (Dkt. 50), is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Specifically, the Court will DENY certification as to Plaintiffs' claim that Perry's failed to fully distribute tip pool funds but GRANT certification of Plaintiffs' side work, uniform and equipment, and remaining tip pool claims.

In her report and recommendation, Judge Hightower limited the scope of the class certification, the length of the opt-in period, and the inclusion of language regarding subsequent lawsuits. (R. & R., Dkt. 78). In light of these changes, IT IS ORDERED that the parties shall submit updated joint proposed notice forms consistent with Judge Hightower's report and recommendation on or before May 30, 2023.

As set out in Judge Hightower's report and recommendation, IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that Perry's shall produce a list in a useable electronic (.xls) format of names, last known addresses, telephone numbers, e-mail addresses, and dates of employment for all members of the collective on or before May 30, 2023.


Summaries of

Paschal v. Perry's Rests.

United States District Court, W.D. Texas, Austin Division
May 16, 2023
1:22-CV-27-RP (W.D. Tex. May. 16, 2023)
Case details for

Paschal v. Perry's Rests.

Case Details

Full title:CANDICE PASCHAL and PEDRO ZARAZUA JR., individually and on behalf of all…

Court:United States District Court, W.D. Texas, Austin Division

Date published: May 16, 2023

Citations

1:22-CV-27-RP (W.D. Tex. May. 16, 2023)

Citing Cases

Brixey v. McAdoo's Seafood Co.

The common issue is whether Defendants required servers and bartenders to perform side work unrelated to…