Carley Ex Rel. Situated v. Crest Pumping Techs., L. L.C., 890 F.3d 575

Crest Pumping employed Carley and Brown as cementers; they sued under the FLSA claiming unpaid overtime after employment in 2014.
Crest asserted the Motor Carrier Act (MCA) exemption to FLSA overtime; parties stipulated Plaintiffs performed driving/loader duties affecting interstate safety.
The SAFETEA-LU Technical Corrections Act ("Corrections Act") carves out "covered employees" performing duties on motor vehicles weighing 10,000 lbs or less from the MCA exemption.
At trial Crest presented uncontradicted evidence that Plaintiffs’ assigned Ford F-350s had a GVWR of 11,500 lbs (doorplate and VIN/manufacturer confirmation); Plaintiffs introduced vehicle registration/title documents listing other "weight" figures but no GVWR evidence.
The magistrate judge instructed the jury that Crest bore the burden to prove the Corrections Act did not apply (i.e., to prove vehicles exceeded 10,000 lbs); jury found for Plaintiffs and judgment entered for them.
On appeal, Crest argued the burden was misallocated and that, under the correct burden and GVWR standard, Plaintiffs failed to prove vehicles weighed 10,000 lbs or less; the court vacated and rendered judgment for Crest.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Who bears burden to prove vehicle weight under the Corrections Act?	Plaintiffs: burden should be on Crest as an exemption-related limitation.	Crest: burden on Plaintiffs because Corrections Act is part of §207 coverage rules.	Burden belongs to Plaintiffs (employee) to prove vehicle weight ≤10,000 lbs; trial court erred by placing it on Crest.
Proper measure of "weight" under the Corrections Act	Plaintiffs: actual unloaded or "empty" weight is the relevant measure.	Crest: GVWR is the appropriate measure; DOL guidance supports GVWR.	GVWR is the proper measure; deference to DOL Field Bulletin under Skidmore persuasive.
Whether Plaintiffs provided legally sufficient evidence of GVWR ≤10,000 lbs	Plaintiffs: registration/title and internet renewal showing 7,600–9,600 lbs show vehicles are ≤10,000 lbs.	Crest: those documents do not show GVWR; Crest presented uncontroverted GVWR evidence of 11,500 lbs.	Plaintiffs presented no competent evidence of GVWR ≤10,000 lbs; JMOL should have been granted for Crest; judgment rendered for Crest.
Remedy for misallocation of burden and lack of GVWR evidence	Plaintiffs: misallocation harmless because evidence of unloaded weight supported jury verdict.	Crest: error prejudicial given lack of GVWR evidence from Plaintiffs.	Error was not harmless; because Plaintiffs lacked GVWR evidence, appellate court vacated and rendered judgment for Crest rather than ordering a new trial.

Encino Motorcars, LLC v. Navarro, 138 S. Ct. 1134 (Sup. Ct.) (FLSA exemptions receive a fair reading)
Samson v. Apollo Resources, Inc., 242 F.3d 629 (5th Cir.) (placement of burden where provision concerns compliance with §207)
Johnson v. Heckmann Water Res. (CVR), Inc., 758 F.3d 627 (5th Cir.) (plaintiff bears burden to prove FLSA coverage)
McCall v. Disabled Am. Veterans, 723 F.3d 962 (8th Cir.) (GVWR is proper weight measure under Corrections Act)
Skidmore v. Swift & Co., 323 U.S. 134 (S. Ct.) (agency interpretations entitled to weight based on persuasiveness)
Maurer v. Hamilton, 309 U.S. 598 (S. Ct.) (historical rejection of unloaded vehicle weight as the relevant safety measure)
Morris v. McComb, 332 U.S. 422 (S. Ct.) (purpose of MCA exemption related to highway safety)
Pyramid Motor Freight Corp. v. Ispass, 330 U.S. 695 (S. Ct.) (defining scope of MCA-related exemptions)
Levinson v. Spector Motor Serv., 330 U.S. 649 (S. Ct.) (MCA exemption scope and application)