Setliff v. Charter Manufacturing Company, Inc.
2:25-cv-00322
| E.D. Wis. | Mar 4, 2025Background
- Plaintiff Timothy Setliff, a former hourly maintenance technician at Charter Manufacturing's Ohio facility, filed a collective and class action for alleged unpaid overtime under the FLSA and Ohio wage laws.
- Setliff alleges Charter's company-wide pay practices, specifically a "pay-to-shift" policy and improper overtime calculations, resulted in unpaid wages for himself and similarly situated employees.
- Setliff requests transfer of the case from the Northern District of Ohio to the Eastern District of Wisconsin, where a nearly identical case (Grap v. Charter Manufacturing) involving employees from Wisconsin and Illinois is already pending.
- Charter Manufacturing, headquartered in Wisconsin, operates facilities in multiple states.
- The legal dispute centers on whether transferring venue would serve the convenience of parties and the interest of justice under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Appropriateness of venue transfer | Transfer will serve judicial economy, consolidate related cases, and the transferee court has jurisdiction. | Opposed transfer; challenged necessity and convenience. | Motion to transfer venue GRANTED. |
| Plaintiff's ability to move transfer | Plaintiff may seek transfer if good reasons arise post-filing. | Plaintiff should be bound by initial choice. | Plaintiffs are not bound if legitimate reasons for transfer exist. |
| Proper venue for nationwide FLSA actions | Venue is proper where employer has principal place of business. | Did not dispute venue in transferee court. | Eastern District of Wisconsin is a proper venue. |
| Prejudice from transfer | No prejudice to defendant; promotes efficiency. | Implied potential inconvenience. | No prejudice found to Charter Manufacturing; transfer appropriate. |
Key Cases Cited
- Atlantic Marine Const. Co. v. U.S. Dist. Ct. for the W. Dist. of Tex., 571 U.S. 49 (factors for evaluating §1404(a) transfer motions)
- Van Dusen v. Barrack, 376 U.S. 612 (transfer must be to a more convenient forum)
- Piper Aircraft Co. v. Reyno, 454 U.S. 235 (listing private and public interest factors)
- Gulf Oil Corp. v. Gilbert, 330 U.S. 501 (forum non conveniens balancing test)
- Ferens v. John Deere Co., 494 U.S. 516 (avoiding duplicative litigation is a strong basis for transfer)