Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

McCants v. C.H. Robinson Worldwide

June 4, 2007

LATOYA R. MCCANTS AND CHRISTOPHER REED, PLAINTIFFS,
v.
C.H. ROBINSON WORLDWIDE, INC., DEFENDANT.
LAURA J. JENEAULT, RICHELLE M. MAKI, NORBERT P. LUKACS, ADAM OLRICH AND QUINTIN DALE OWENS, PLAINTIFFS,
v.
C.H. ROBINSON WORLDWIDE, INC., DEFENDANT.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge Ronald A. Guzmán

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

Plaintiffs have sued C.H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. ("CHRW") under the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq., claiming that it owes them overtime pay. CHRW has filed motions pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § ("section") 1404(a) to transfer the McCants case to the Western District of North Carolina and the Jeneault case to the Northern District of New York. For the reasons set forth below, the motions are granted.

Discussion

In relevant part, section 1404 states, "[f]or the convenience of parties and witnesses, in the interest of justice, a district court may transfer any civil action to any other district .. . where it might have been brought." 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). Transfer is appropriate under this section if: "(1) venue is proper in the transferor district; (2) venue and jurisdiction are proper in the transferee district; and (3) the transfer will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses and will promote the interest of justice." Amoco Oil Co. v. Mobil Oil Corp., 90 F. Supp. 2d 958, 959 (N.D. Ill. 2000).

It is undisputed that jurisdiction and venue are proper both here and in the proposed transferee districts. Therefore, the Court will address only the third factor -- the convenience of the parties and witnesses and the interest of justice.

To evaluate this factor, the Court must examine various private and public interests.

Saunders v. Franklin, 25 F. Supp. 2d 855, 857 (N.D. Ill. 1998). The private interests concern the litigation's impact on the parties, and include: "(1) the plaintiff's choice of forum, (2) the situs of the material events, (3) the relative ease of access to sources of proof, (4) the convenience to the parties, and (5) the convenience of the witnesses." Amoco Oil Co., 90 F. Supp. 2d at 960. The public interests concern the litigation's impact on the court system, and include "the speed at which the case will proceed to trial, the court's familiarity with the applicable law, the relation of the community to the occurrence at issue, and the desirability of resolving controversies in their locale." Id. at 961-62.

Plaintiff's Choice of Forum & Situs of Material Events

A plaintiff's choice of forum is given significant weight, unless it has little connection to the events underlying the suit. See Heller Fin., Inc. v. Riverdale Auto Parts, Inc., 713 F. Supp. 1125, 1129 (N.D. Ill. 1989). Such is the case here. None of the plaintiffs resides in this district. (See McCants Compl. ¶¶ 5-6 (alleging that plaintiffs reside in North Carolina); Jeneault Compl. ¶¶ 5-9 (alleging that four plaintiffs reside in New York and one resides in Georgia).) Further, the events underlying this case did not occur here. Plaintiffs' FLSA claims are based on CHRW's alleged misclassification of plaintiffs as exempt employees, and the resulting failure to pay them overtime, both of which occurred in the proposed transferee districts. (See McCants Compl. ¶¶ 5-6 (alleging that plaintiffs worked in CHRW's Charlotte, North Carolina branch); Jeneault Compl. ¶¶ 5-9 (alleging that plaintiffs worked in CHRW's Syracuse, New York branch)); Carlson v. C.H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc., Nos. 02-3780 (JNE/JJG) & 02-4261 (JNE/JJG), 2006 WL 2830015, at *1 (D. Minn. Sept. 26, 2006) (stating in the context of an identical suit, that "[b]ranch managers are responsible for determining whether an employee is paid on a salaried or hourly basis and whether employees are classified as exempt under the FLSA"). Because this district is not where plaintiffs reside or where the material events occurred, plaintiffs' choice of forum receives little deference. Thus, taken together, the forum choice and situs of material events factors favor transferring the cases.

Relative Ease of Access to Proof

The documentary evidence, though located in New York and North Carolina, is easy to transport. Thus, this factor has no impact on the analysis. See Stanley v. Marion, No. 04 C 514, 2004 WL 1611074, at *3 (N.D. Ill. Jul. 16, 2004).

Convenience of the Parties

The convenience of the parties factor concerns the parties' "respective residences and abilities to bear the expense of trial in a particular forum." Medi USA v Jobst Inst., Inc., 791 F. Supp. 208, 210 (N.D. Ill. 1992). The McCants plaintiffs both live in North Carolina, four of the Jeneault plaintiffs live in New York and one lives in Georgia. Thus, trying McCants in North Carolina and Jeneault in New York would be more convenient for and less costly to plaintiffs than trying the cases here. See Clearclad Coatings, Inc. v. Xontal, Ltd., No. 98 C 7119, 1999 WL 652030, at *11 (N.D. Ill. Aug. 20, 1999) ("It is axiomatic that ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.