Carter v. Brackenbox, Inc.
1:23-cv-03329
N.D. Ill.Sep 24, 2024Background
- Plaintiff Brian L. Carter was employed as a roll-off truck driver by Brackenbox, Inc., from July 2019 to February 2023.
- Carter alleges he was paid hourly (at $20, later $25 per hour) and worked over 60 hours per week without receiving overtime pay.
- Carter claims this failure to pay overtime violated the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and the Illinois Minimum Wage Act (IMWA).
- Defendants (Brackenbox, Kelly Bracken, James Bracken) moved to dismiss the complaint under Rule 12(b)(6) based on the Motor Carrier Act (MCA) overtime exemption.
- Procedurally, the case is before the court on a motion to dismiss; no factual record beyond the pleadings is considered at this stage.
- The key dispute is whether Carter’s claim is precluded by the MCA exemption, and whether he needed to plead facts negating that exemption.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does plaintiff need to plead around the MCA overtime exemption? | Carter does not need to anticipate or plead against affirmative defenses like the MCA exemption. | Carter’s complaint must be dismissed because it fails to negate the MCA exemption, which applies to truck drivers. | No; plaintiff is not required to plead facts negating the MCA exemption; this is an affirmative defense for defendants. |
| Is the complaint plausible under FLSA/IMWA? | Plaintiff alleges specific facts showing he worked overtime without pay. | His allegations are insufficient because he hasn’t excluded the MCA exemption. | Yes; the complaint sufficiently alleges a plausible claim under FLSA/IMWA. |
| Can the court take judicial notice of Brackenbox’s status as a "motor carrier" from FMCSA website? | Such status is not plead in the complaint and cannot be judicially noticed. | Court should take judicial notice of FMCSA website to show Brackenbox is a motor carrier. | No; judicial notice is inappropriate for FMCSA website data at this stage. |
| Has plaintiff pled himself out of court by describing job duties? | Stating he was a truck driver doesn’t admit MCA exemption applies. | By alleging he was a roll-off truck driver, Carter admits MCA exemption applies. | No; pleading job title alone does not establish the MCA exemption. |
Key Cases Cited
- Corning Glass Works v. Brennan, 417 U.S. 188 (affirmative defense burden for FLSA exemptions lies with employer)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (plausibility standard for pleadings)
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (plausibility standard for pleadings)
- Blanchar v. Standard Ins. Co., 736 F.3d 753 (burden of proof for FLSA exemptions and their narrow construction)
- Yeftich v. Navistar, Inc., 722 F.3d 911 (motion to dismiss standard and assumption of truth for well-pled facts)