Fernandez v. Clean House, LLC
883 F.3d 1296
| 10th Cir. | 2018Background
- Plaintiffs Fernandez and Chacon worked as house cleaners for Clean House and Cesar Barrida from May 2013 until Feb–Apr 2014 and allege they worked long hours without FLSA-required wages/overtime due to misclassification as independent contractors.
- Plaintiffs filed an FLSA suit on Aug 24, 2016 — between two and three years after employment ended — so recovery depends on whether Defendants’ violations were "willful" (3-year statute) rather than nonwillful (2-year statute).
- The operative complaint alleges willfulness in boilerplate language asserting Clean House "knew of the FLSA" and "willfully violated" its mandates.
- Defendants moved to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), arguing the willfulness allegation lacked factual support post-Twombly/Iqbal and thus the claims were time-barred.
- The district court dismissed the FLSA claims with prejudice for failure to plausibly plead willfulness. Plaintiffs appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether plaintiffs needed to plead willfulness to avoid a statute-of-limitations dismissal | Plaintiffs argued statute-of-limitations is an affirmative defense; they need not anticipate it in the complaint and their willfulness allegation was adequate | Defendants argued plaintiffs must plead factual support for willfulness under Twombly/Iqbal or face dismissal as time-barred | Reversed: plaintiffs did not have to anticipate the affirmative defense; their allegation of willfulness was adequate at the pleading stage |
| Whether the boilerplate allegation of willfulness satisfied Rule 9(b)/Rule 8 standards | Plaintiffs relied on Rule 9(b) allowance to generally plead mental state and cited analogous Ninth Circuit precedent | Defendants argued Iqbal/Twombly require more than conclusory allegations to plausibly allege scienter | Court held Rule 9(b) permits general pleading of intent and Rivera supports sufficiency here; the willfulness allegation survived dismissal |
Key Cases Cited
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (pleading must be plausible)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (conclusory allegations insufficient to show plausibility of intent)
- Gomez v. Toledo, 446 U.S. 635 (burden of pleading affirmative defenses rests with defendant)
- Rivera v. Peri & Sons Farms, Inc., 735 F.3d 892 (9th Cir.) (willfulness may be adequately alleged with general intent language)
- Xechem, Inc. v. Bristol-Myers Squibb Co., 372 F.3d 899 (7th Cir.) (complaint may be dismissed on pleadings only if plaintiff pleads itself out of court)