Benjamin Orozco v. Pane E. Vino, Incorporated
757 F.3d 445
| 5th Cir. | 2014Background
- Plackis owns Roxs Enterprises, the franchisor of Craig O’s, and San Marcos and Southwest locations are involved in the dispute.
- Orozco was hired as a cook at the San Marcos location; his salary was changed from $1,200 bi-weekly to $1,050, then to $10 per hour in 2011.
- Orozco sued the Entjers for FLSA violations; he settled with the Entjers and Plackis was added as a defendant.
- A jury found for Orozco, concluding Plackis was his employer, the enterprise was covered by the FLSA, and violations were willful; the magistrate judge denied JML.
- The court reverses and renders in favor of Plackis, holding insufficient evidence to establish Plackis as Orozco’s FLSA employer under the economic reality test.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Plackis was Orozco’s employer under the FLSA | Orozco argues Plackis exercised economic control over employment. | Plackis contends no economic reality evidence supports employer status; franchise agreement is insufficient. | Insufficient evidence; reversed and judgment for Plackis. |
| Whether there was evidence Plackis could hire/fire Orozco (first element) | Evidence supports Plackis’s hiring/firing authority. | Evidence shows Sandra, not Plackis, controlled hiring/firing. | No legally sufficient evidence of hiring/firing authority. |
| Whether Plackis supervised and controlled Orozco’s work schedules/conditions (second element) | Plackis’s visits and communications implied control over schedules/conditions. | No direct control; Sandra retained scheduling authority; meeting alone insufficient. | Insufficient evidence of supervision/control of schedules or conditions. |
| Whether Plackis determined Orozco’s rate and method of payment (third element) | Plackis’s involvement implied payment familiarity and influence. | Sandra set pay; Plackis did not determine pay. | Not proven that Plackis determined pay method. |
Key Cases Cited
- Gray v. Powers, 673 F.3d 352 (5th Cir. 2012) (economic reality test applied to employer status)
- Martin v. Spring Break ’83 Prods., LLC, 688 F.3d 247 (5th Cir. 2012) (dominant theme of control within economic reality test)
- McLaughlin v. Seafood, Inc., 867 F.2d 875 (5th Cir. 1989) (remedial purposes of FLSA; broaden employer definition)
- Arsement v. Spinnaker Exploration Co., 400 F.3d 238 (5th Cir. 2005) (standard for reviewing JML; evidence viewed in plaintiff’s favor)
- SMI Owen Steel Co. v. Marsh USA, Inc., 520 F.3d 432 (5th Cir. 2008) (standard for evaluating JML; deference to jury verdict)
- Baisden v. I’m Ready Prods., Inc., 693 F.3d 491 (5th Cir. 2012) (deference in evaluating jury verdicts; evidence must support more than mere scintilla)