Franks v. MKM Oil, Inc.
1:10-cv-00013
N.D. Ill.Sep 7, 2012Background
- MKM Oil operates 30–40 Illinois retail stations; each location employs 5–20 employees.
- Plaintiffs Franks (Assistant Manager) and Jordan (cashier) sue MKM for IMWL, IWPCA, and FLSA claims.
- MKM tracked time in RUBY (minutes) but paid via ADP ( Military Time-like hundredths); hours were entered via handwritten weekly sheets.
- Conversion from RUBY to ADP caused under-recording of time (e.g., 4:30 read as 4.30, losing .20 hours).
- Plaintiffs allege company-wide deductions for losses (drive-offs) and off-the-clock work without pay.
- Plaintiffs seek class certification for state-law claims and conditional certification for the FLSA collective action.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Time-conversion class certification under IWPCA | Franks supports a common IWPCA issue for all affected employees. | Claims are not sufficiently ascertainable or predominating across the class. | Class certified for IWPCA time-conversion claim. |
| IMWL, IWPCA drive-off and off-the-clock class certification | Policies affected many employees nationwide across stores. | Claims are not ascertainable; individual inquiries predominate; not clearly widespread. | IMWL/IWPCA drive-off and off-the-clock classes not certified. |
| FLSA conditional certification | Employees are similarly situated for unpaid wages/overtime. | Uniformity lacks; many individualized defenses would apply. | FLSA conditional certification denied. |
| Class representation adequacy | Named plaintiffs adequately represent class. | Jordan's bankruptcy listing undermines credibility and ownership of claims. | Class certified only on IWPCA time-conversion; not on others. |
Key Cases Cited
- Oshana v. Coca-Cola Co., 472 F.3d 506 (7th Cir. 2006) (commonality and typicality considerations in class certification)
- Harper v. Sheriff of Cook Cnty., 581 F.3d 511 (7th Cir. 2009) (standard for Rule 23(a) adequacy and related requirements)
- Weismueller v. Kosobucki, 513 F.3d 784 (7th Cir. 2008) (rigorous analysis required for class certification)
- Creative Montessori Learning Ctrs. v. Ashford Gear LLC, 662 F.3d 913 (7th Cir. 2011) (overlap of merits and certification; court’s discretion in certification)
- Dukes v. Walmart Stores, Inc., 131 S. Ct. 2541 (2011) (commonality analysis; nationwide class actions under Rule 23)
- Retired Chicago Police Ass’n v. City of Chicago, 7 F.3d 584 (7th Cir. 1993) (adequacy of representation framework for class actions)
- Am. Honda Motor Co. v. Allen, 600 F.3d 813 (7th Cir. 2010) (common issues and overlap with merits in class certification)
- Szabo v. Bridgeport Machs., Inc., 249 F.3d 672 (7th Cir. 2001) (commonality and predominance considerations in class actions)