Our Wage and Hour Cases

The Winebrake Law Firm represents workers in Federal Court lawsuits seeking to recover lost wages and overtime pay for hard-working clients and their families.  Our wage and overtime lawsuits assert violations of the federal Fair Labor Standards Act, the Pennsylvania Minimum Wage Act, and similar wage and hour laws.

Some of The Winebrake Law Firm’s wage and hour cases are briefly described below:

Open Cases:

In Cole, et al. v. Appliances Unlimited, Inc., 2:07-cv-04275-TMG (E.D. Pa.), The Winebrake Law Firm seeks to recover unpaid regular and overtime pay for service technicians who allegedly were not paid for all hours worked and allegedly did not receive the full overtime premium for all hours worked over 40 in a workweek.

In Kline v. Darryl Koch Trucking, Inc., 2:07-cv-04302-JS (E.D. Pa.), The Winebrake Law Firm seeks to recover unpaid overtime for drivers who allegedly were misclassified as exempt from receiving overtime under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act and the Pennsylvania Minimum Wage Act.

In Nash v. Preferred Meal Systems, Inc., 3:07-cv-01618 (M.D. Pa.), The Winebrake Law Firm represents a “Freezer Supervisor” who alleges that he was misclassified as exempt from receiving overtime pay under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act and the Pennsylvania Minimum Wage Act.

In Dunn v. National Beef Packing Company, LLC, 4:07-cv-01599-JEJ (M.D. Pa.), The Winebrake Law Firm seeks to recover unpaid wages and overtime pay for Central Pennsylvania meat processing workers.  The named plaintiff alleges, on behalf of himself and other workers, that the company violated the Fair Labor Standards Act by failing to pay him and his co-workers for all time spent performing work-related activities such as donning and doffing protective gear and equipment.

In Gallagher, et al. v. Bayada Nurses, Inc., Index No. 000392, October 2007 Term (Pa. Common Pleas, Phila. Cty.), The Winebrake Law Firm seeks to recover overtime and travel time pay for home health aids and visiting nurses under the Pennsylvania Minimum Wage Act and the Pennsylvania Wage Payment and Collection Law.

In Mayan, et al. v. Rydbom Express, Inc., 2:07-cv-02658-LS (E.D. Pa.), The Winebrake Law Firm seeks to recover unpaid overtime for delivery drivers who allegedly were misclassified as exempt from receiving overtime under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act and the Pennsylvania Minimum Wage Act.

In Estock, et al. v. The Citizens’ Voice, et al., 3:07-cv-00784-TIV (M.D. Pa.), The Winebrake Law Firm represents a newspaper’s “District Sales Managers” who allege that they were misclassified as exempt from receiving overtime pay under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act and the Pennsylvania Minimum Wage Act.

In Jimenez, et al. v. Rosenbaum-Cunningham, Inc., et al., 2:07-cv-01066-RBS (E.D. Pa.), The Winebrake Law Firm represents janitors who allege that they were not paid for thousands of hours spent cleaning some of the nation’s most well known theme restaurants and entertainment venues in violation of the federal Fair Labor Standards Act.

In Malec v. Kost Tire & Muffler, et al., 3:07-cv-00864-ARC (M.D. Pa.), The Winebrake Law Firm seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages to service technicians whose overtime pay allegedly was determined based on an improper calculation formula.

In Fowler, et al. v. Family Dollar Stores, Inc. et al., 3:07-cv-00316-GCM (W.D.N.C.), and Blake, et al. v. Family Dollar Stores, Inc., et al., 3:07-cv-00244-GCM (W.D.N.C.), The Winebrake Law Firm, working with co-counsel, represents salaried “Store Managers” who allege that they were denied overtime pay under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act because their company misclassified them as exempt executive employees.

In In re. FedEx Ground Package System, Inc. Employment Practices Litigation, MDL No. 1700 (N.D. Ind.), and Givens, et al. v. Federal Express Corporation, 3:07-cv-00324-RLM-CAN (N.D. Ind.), The Winebrake Law Firm, working with co-counsel, represents delivery drivers who allege that the company denied them overtime pay by misclassifying them as independent contractors.

In Evans, et al. v. Lowe’s Home Centers, Inc., 3:03-cv-00438-ARC (M.D. Pa.), and Smith, et al. v. Lowe’s Home Centers, Inc., 2:04-cv-00774-GLF-NMK (S.D. Ohio), The Winebrake Law Firm, working with co-counsel, represents Pennsylvania and Ohio retail workers who allege that the company miscalculated their overtime pay in violation of the federal Fair Labor Standards Act and applicable state laws.

In Blasi, et al. v. United Financial Management Group, Inc., 3:06-cv-01519-JMM-TMB (M.D. Pa.), The Winebrake Law Firm represents former mortgage loan officers who allege that they were denied full overtime pay and were not credited for all hours worked.

In In re: Pilgrim’s Pride Fair Labor Standards Act Litigation, 1:07-cv-01832-HFB (W.D. Ark), and In re Pennsylvania Pilgrim’s Pride Wage and Hour Litig., 2:06-cv-01249-JPH (E.D. Pa.), The Winebrake Law Firm, working with co-counsel, represents hundreds of poultry workers who allege that they were not paid for all time spent performing work-related activities such as donning and doffing protective gear and equipment in violation of the federal Fair Labor Standards Act.

In King, et al v. Koch Foods of Mississippi, LLC, 3:06-cv-00301-TLS-JCS (S.D. Miss.), The Winebrake Law Firm, working with co-counsel, represents hundreds of Mississippi poultry workers who allege that they were not paid for all time spent performing work-related activities such as donning and doffing protective gear and equipment.

In In Re Tyson Foods, Inc., Fair Labor Standards Act Litigation, 4:07-md-01854-CDL (M.D. Ga.), and Balch, et al. v. Tyson Foods, Inc., 4:07-cv-02016-CDL (M.D. Ga.), The Winebrake Law Firm, working with co-counsel, represents poultry workers who allege that they were not paid for all time spent performing work-related activities such as donning and doffing protective gear and equipment in violation of the federal Fair Labor Standards Act.

In In Re Cargill Meat Solutions Corp. Wage and Hour Litigation, 3:06-cv-00513-WJN (M.D. Pa.), The Federal Court has appointed The Winebrake Law Firm to serve as Co-Lead Counsel on behalf of hundreds of beef processing workers who allege that they were not paid for all time spent performing work-related activities such as donning and doffing protective gear and equipment.  Status: Settlement on behalf of workers in the company’s Wyalusing, Pennsylvania plant approved by Federal Court in July 2007; claims on behalf of workers in the company’s Hazleton, Pennsylvania plant remain open.

In Barletta, et al. v. Lagana Plumbing and Heating, Inc., et al., 3:06-cv-00916-TIV (M.D. Pa.), The Winebrake Law Firm represents laborers who allege that they were not paid for all hours worked in violation of the federal Fair Labor Standards Act and the Pennsylvania Minimum Wage Act.

In Woodard v. Fedex Freight East, Inc., 3:06-cv-01968-TIV (M.D. Pa.), The Winebrake Law Firm, working with co-counsel, seeks to recover overtime pay for workers who allege that they were misclassified as exempt from overtime under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act and the Pennsylvania Minimum Wage Act.


Recently Resolved Cases:
In Rivera, et al. v. Joseph E. Sucher & Sons Inc., 2:07-cv-01771-RK (E.D. Pa.), The Winebrake Law Firm represents laborers who allege that they were required to work off-the-clock without receiving regular or overtime pay.  In October 2007, the Federal Court approved a settlement that provided the workers with back wages.

In Sisko v. Wegmans Food Market, Inc., 3:06-cv-00433-JMM (M.D. Pa.), The Winebrake Law Firm represents warehouse workers who allege that they were not paid for all pre-shift work activities.  After appointing The Winebrake Law Firm to serve as Lead Counsel on behalf of the workers, the Federal Court approved the class action settlement in August 2007.  Under the settlement, over 100 workers will receive valuable back-pay benefits.

In Gorey, et al. v. Plymouth Borough, 3:07-cv-00182-TIV (M.D. Pa), The Winebrake Law Firm represents municipal police officers who allege that they were not paid for all hours worked and that they were denied full overtime pay for all hours spent in criminal court activities.  In August 2007, the Federal Court approved a settlement that resulted in the police officers receiving compensation for all of their unpaid work hours.

In In Re Cargill Meat Solutions Corp. Wage and Hour Litigation, 3:06-cv-00513-WJN (M.D. Pa.), The Federal Court appointed The Winebrake Law Firm to serve as Co-Lead Counsel on behalf of hundreds of beef processing workers who allege that they were not paid for all time spent performing work-related activities such as donning and doffing protective gear and equipment.  In July 2007, the Federal Court approved a settlement that will provide backpay to hundreds of workers from the company’s Wyalusing, Pennsylvania plant.

In Otto v. Pocono Health System, et al., 4:06-cv-01186-JEJ (M.D. Pa.), the Federal Court appointed The Winebrake Law Firm to serve as Lead Counsel to represent hundreds of hospital workers who allege that their overtime pay was miscalculated under the Fair Labor Standards Act’s “8-and-80” regulation.  In May 2007, the Federal Court approved a settlement that will provide backpay to hundreds of workers who have elected to participate in the settlement.

In Rodriguez-Fargas, et al. v. Hatfield Quality Meats, Inc,, 2:06-cv-01206-LS (E.D. Pa.), the Federal Court appointed The Winebrake Law Firm to serve as Lead Counsel to represent hundreds of pork processing workers who allege that they were not paid for all time spent performing work-related activities such as donning and doffing protective gear and equipment.  In May 2007, the Federal Court approved a settlement that will provide backpay to over 1,000 workers.

In Brubaker, et al. v. Yingst Exterminating Company, Inc., et al., 1:06-cv-01956-CCC (M.D. Pa.), The Winebrake Law Firm represents four salaried “Service Technicians” who allege that they were denied overtime pay because their company misclassified them as exempt from the overtime pay requirement.  In May, 2007, the Federal Court approved a settlement that provided valuable backpay to each of the workers.

In Miller, et al.  v. Antenna Star Satellites, Inc., et al., 3:06-cv-00647-ARC (M.D. Pa.), The Winebrake Law Firm represents 13 satellite dish installers who allege that they were denied overtime benefits by being misclassified as independent contractors.  In May 2007, the Federal Court approved a settlement that provided the workers with unpaid wages.

In Cummins v. Dolgencorp, Inc., 4:06-cv-01685-JEJ (M.D. Pa.), The Winebrake Law Firm represents a salaried “Store Manager” who alleges that she was denied overtime pay because a retail chain misclassified her as an exempt executive/administrative employee.   The Federal Court approved the settlement of this lawsuit in May 2007.

In Lanzo v. M&B Inn Partners, et al., 3:07-cv-00377-JMM (M.D. Pa.), The Winebrake Law Firm represents a hotel’s salaried “Assistant General Manager” who alleges that she was denied overtime pay because the hotel misclassified her as exempt from the FLSA’s overtime requirement.  The Federal Court approved the settlement of this lawsuit in April 2007.

In Chernesky v. Boyer’s Market, Inc., 3:06-cv-02326-JMM (M.D. Pa.), The Winebrake Law Firm represents a salaried “Maintenance Assistant” who alleges that he was denied overtime pay because a supermarket chain misclassified him as exempt from the overtime requirement.  The Federal Court approved the settlement of this lawsuit in March 2007.