523 F. App'x 549
11th Cir.2013Background
- John Mann worked as maintenance/groundskeeper at Adelaide Shores RV Resort; he sued after termination claiming unpaid overtime under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).
- Adelaide Shores is an RV park largely serving wintering retirees; ~92% of revenue from lot rentals, remainder from RV sales; some lots permanently occupied, many leased annually.
- Mann worked as an independent contractor for years, became employee in 2009, was fired in Nov. 2011; a jury later awarded him unpaid overtime wages of $37,007.94.
- The Falks (owners) moved for summary judgment asserting Adelaide Shores is an "amusement or recreational establishment" exempt from FLSA overtime; district court held it did not qualify and granted partial summary judgment for Mann.
- The Falks also contended the business was seasonal and raised other defenses; the court resolved an unjust enrichment claim as preempted by federal law and the retaliation claim went to the jury (which ruled for the Falks on retaliation).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Adelaide Shores is an "amusement or recreational establishment" exempting it from FLSA overtime | Mann: principal activity is selling/leasing RV lots and RVs, not providing recreation; exemption inapplicable | Falks: clientele come for recreation and the park offers activities, so it is a recreational establishment | Court: Not exempt — principal activity is sale/lease of RV lots and RVs, not recreation; exemption construed narrowly |
| Whether court needed to decide the seasonal test for the exemption | Mann: N/A — if not a recreational establishment, seasonal test irrelevant | Falks: Even if recreational, business is seasonal and would satisfy statutory seasonal test | Court: Did not reach seasonal issue because establishment status failed (no recreational establishment) |
Key Cases Cited
- Alvarez Perez v. Sanford-Orlando Kennel Club, Inc., 515 F.3d 1150 (11th Cir. 2008) (recreational exemption construed narrowly; employer bears burden)
- Jeffrey v. Sarasota White Sox, Inc., 64 F.3d 590 (11th Cir. 1995) (minor league baseball team qualifies as recreational establishment)
- Brennan v. Texas City Dike & Marina, Inc., 492 F.2d 1115 (5th Cir. 1974) (principal-activity/major-income-source test for recreational establishment)
- Josendis v. Wall to Wall Residence Repairs, Inc., 662 F.3d 1292 (11th Cir. 2011) (deference to agency regulations where statutory terms undefined)
- Christensen v. Harris County, 529 U.S. 576 (2000) (offering deference guidance for agency interpretations)