Biller v. Cafe Luna of Naples, Inc.
2:14-cv-00659
M.D. Fla.Apr 13, 2015Background
- Plaintiff Kristen Biller sued Café Luna entities and two individuals under the FLSA seeking unpaid minimum wage and overtime on behalf of herself and a putative collective.
- Defendants filed an Answer asserting multiple affirmative defenses and a demand for attorneys’ fees.
- Plaintiff moved to strike several affirmative defenses and the attorneys’ fees demand as inadequately pled or not viable in an FLSA case; Defendants did not respond.
- The challenged defenses included: invocation of the FLSA generally; waiver/estoppel/laches; accord and satisfaction/settlement/payment/release; failure to exhaust administrative remedies; failure to mitigate; and a reservation to assert additional defenses later.
- The Court evaluated the sufficiency of affirmative defenses under Rule 8, Twombly/Iqbal notice and plausibility standards, and Rule 12(f) standards for striking insufficient defenses.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of broadly pled affirmative defenses | Biller: defenses are conclusory and give no notice; should be stricken | Defendants: (no response filed) implicitly relied on existing pleading | Court: struck defenses as bare-bones; granted leave to amend certain defenses |
| Reservation to assert additional defenses later | Biller: improper; not a defense to Complaint | Defendants: sought to preserve rights to add defenses during discovery | Court: struck reservation; allowed future amendments only by motion |
| Demand for attorneys’ fees in Answer | Biller: fees demand is not a defense under FLSA and does not respond to allegations | Defendants: asserted entitlement to fees (no substantive basis alleged) | Court: struck attorneys’ fees demand; prevailing defendants not entitled absent bad faith |
| Leave to amend stricken defenses | Biller: requested strike without leave or with leave to amend | Defendants: n/a | Court: granted leave to amend five defenses within 14 days |
Key Cases Cited
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (pleading requires factual plausibility)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (affirmative defenses must be plausible and give fair notice)
- Wright v. Southland Corp., 187 F.3d 1287 (11th Cir.) (definition and role of affirmative defenses)
- Microsoft Corp. v. Jesse's Computers & Repair, Inc., 211 F.R.D. 681 (M.D. Fla. 2002) (conclusory affirmative defenses must be stricken)
- Hassan v. U.S. Postal Serv., 842 F.2d 260 (11th Cir. 1988) (notice purpose of pleading requirement)
- Turlington v. Atlanta Gas Light Co., 135 F.3d 1428 (11th Cir.) (defendant attorneys’ fees under FLSA only for bad-faith litigation)