928 F. Supp. 2d 473
D. Conn.2013Background
- Plaintiffs Costello and Moore allege Home Depot failed to pay overtime under the FLSA.
- Home Depot moves for summary judgment arguing Costello and Moore are exempt executives.
- Court reviews whether MASMs/ASMs/SASMs qualify as bona fide executives under 29 C.F.R. § 541.100(a).
- Material facts about duties, time spent on exempt vs nonexempt work, and supervisory authority are disputed.
- Court denies both motions, finding genuine issues of material fact remain as to primary duty and supervision.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Costello is a bona fide executive under FLSA exemption | Costello primarily performed nonexempt duties; not primarily managerial. | Costello’s management duties and supervision show primary executive role. | Material facts disputed; summary judgment denied |
| Whether Moore is a bona fide executive under FLSA exemption | Moore spent substantial nonexempt tasks; not primarily managerial. | Moore’s supervisory and strategic duties show primary executive role. | Material facts disputed; summary judgment denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Donovan v. Burger King Corp., 675 F.2d 516 (2d Cir. 1982) (managerial duties indicate primary duty when essential to operation)
- Clougher v. Home Depot, 696 F. Supp. 2d 285 (E.D.N.Y. 2010) (factual disputes preclude summary judgment on primary duty)
- Johnson v. Big Lots Stores, Inc., 604 F. Supp. 2d 903 (E.D. La. 2009) (multifactor analysis for primary duty in retail settings)
- Morgan v. Family Dollar Stores, 551 F.3d 1233 (11th Cir. 2008) (discretion and supervision relate to primary duty analysis)
- Thomas v. Speedway SuperAmerica, LLC, 506 F.3d 496 (6th Cir. 2007) (importance of managerial duties to business operation)