Recently Filed Cases

Wage and Overtime Law

On October 10, 2011, Sommers Schwartz attorneys Jason Thompson, Lance Young, Matt Turner, and Jesse Young filed a collective action lawsuit on behalf of their clients under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) against William Beaumont Hospital. Plaintiffs' complaint alleges that Beaumont knowingly and willfully committed wage theft against its Physician's Assistants (PA) and Nurse Practitioners (NP) by deliberately misclassifying them as "salaried-exempt" in order to evade the overtime requirements of the FLSA. The complaint claims that Beaumont's PAs and NPs were paid on an hourly basis and received overtime pay until December 31, 2008. However, as of January 1, 2009, Beaumont abandoned this pay practice, announcing that it would no longer pay overtime to its PAs and NPs and changed their compensation structure to a salary basis. The lawsuit is currently pending in the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Michigan (Schlaff, et al v. William Beaumont Hospital, Case No. 2:11-cv-14443).

On March 28, 2011, Sommers Schwartz attorneys Jason Thompson, Dan Swanson, and Jesse Young filed a lawsuit on behalf of their client under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and for breach of contract as against Sara Lee Corporation. Plaintiff's complaint alleges that Sara Lee knowingly and willfully failed to pay its employees a minimum wage and overtime compensation as required under the FLSA. The complaint claims that Sara Lee had a policy of not compensating employees for time spent donning protective gear prior to punching-in for work and the time spent doffing the protective gear after punching-out. The complaint further claims that Sara Lee's employees were not compensated for doffing after their lunch breaks began and for donning before their lunch breaks ended. The lawsuit is currently pending in the U.S. District Court, Western District of Michigan ( Duran v. Sara Lee Corp., Case No. 1:11-cv-00313).

On March 24, 2011, Sommers Schwartz attorneys Jason Thompson, Dan Swanson, and Jesse Young filed a lawsuit on behalf of their client under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) as against JBS Plainwell, Inc., Smithfield Beef Group-Plainwell, Inc., and Packerland-Plainwell, Inc. ("Defendants"). Plaintiff's complaint alleges that Defendants knowingly and willfully failed to pay its employees a minimum wage and overtime compensation as required under the FLSA. The complaint claims that Defendants had a policy of not compensating employees for time spent donning protective gear prior to punching-in for work and the time spent doffing the protective gear after punching-out. The complaint further claims that Defendants' employees were not compensated for doffing after their lunch breaks began and for donning before their lunch breaks ended. The lawsuit is currently pending in the U.S. District Court, Western District of Michigan (Lucas v. JBS Plainwell, Inc., et al., Case No. 1:11-cv-00302).

On December 14, 2010, Sommers Schwartz attorneys Jason Thompson, Dan Swanson, and Jesse Young filed a lawsuit on behalf of their clients under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) as against Amurcon Corporation. Plaintiffs' complaint alleges that Amurcon Corporation knowingly and willfully failed to pay its employees overtime compensation as required under the FLSA. The complaint further claims that all current and former employees of the company were subjected to unlawful pay practices, as evidenced by the company's written policies and company e-mails, which reveal the company's efforts to "fix" employee time-records and its efforts to give employees "comp" time in lieu of overtime pay. The lawsuit is currently pending in the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Michigan (Shipes, et al. v. Amurcon Corporation, Case No. 2:10-cv-14943).

On October 15, 2010, Sommers Schwartz attorneys Jason Thompson, Dan Swanson, and Jesse Young filed a lawsuit on behalf of their client under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and for breach of contract as against Quicken Loans, Inc. Plaintiff's complaint alleges that Quicken Loans knowingly and willfully failed to pay its clerical and secretarial employees a minimum wage and overtime compensation as required under the FLSA. The complaint further claims that Quicken Loans's clerical and secretarial employees were subjected to unlawful pay practices, as evidenced by the company's practice of requiring its employees to adjust their own time clocks to reflect only forty (40) hours of work in any given week, regardless of whether they actually worked more than forty hours. The lawsuit is currently pending in the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Michigan (Knight v. Quicken Loans, Inc., Case No. 2:10-cv-14147).

Employment Discrimination

Case filed in federal court against a major Michigan non-profit eye-care provider for the defamation, discrimination, and wrongful termination of its former President and CEO. Plaintiff claims that, before she was terminated, the company published untrue statements about her, asserting that she had misappropriated funds from the company. Those statements were later proved to be false. Plaintiff also claims that the company discriminated against her by terminating her employment on the basis of sex and for taking an approved medical leave pursuant to the Family Medical Leave Act. The lawsuit is currently pending in the United States District Court, Eastern District of Michigan.

Business Litigation: Breach of employment contracts

On July 7, 2010, Judge Sean Cox of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, granted summary judgment in favor of the Firm's clients in Holbrook et al. v. GenTek, Inc., Case No. 08-12179. In connection with the Holbrook litigation, the Firm's business litigation group represents six Plaintiffs who previously served as executives for the Defendant GenTek. Upon GenTek's 2007 sale of Plaintiffs' business unit, GenTek failed and refused to pay Plaintiffs' performance awards as mandated by written contracts entered into between the Plaintiffs and the company. By way of its July 7, 2010 ruling, the Court determined that Plaintiffs were entitled to the performance awards (exceeding a cumulative amount of $305,000), and that the Defendant's defenses were without merit.

Employment Litigation: Unlawful Retaliatory Termination

On September 24, 2010 Sommers Schwartz attorney Kevin J. Stoops and Daniel D. Swanson filed a lawsuit on behalf of their client, a former custodial worker, against Southgate School District in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan (Scamp v. Southgate Community School District, Case No. 10-13819). Plaintiffs' Complaint, alleging violations of anti-discrimination statutes including Title VII and Michigan's Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act, was necessitated by her discriminatory and retaliatory termination by Southgate School District. Specifically, Plaintiff's employment was terminated after she filed complaints with the School District about her supervisor engaging in illegal sexual harassment including making illegal sexual contact on two separate occasions.

Employment Litigation: Age Discrimination Resulting in Unlawful Termination

On September 28, 2010 Sommers Schwartz attorneys Kevin J. Stoops and Daniel D. Swanson filed a lawsuit on behalf of their client, a former Vice-President with an exemplary 36 year employment history, against Fitness USA (along with its owner and Chief Executive Officer) in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan (Kulka v. Fitness USA, et al., Case No. 10-13863). Plaintiffs' Complaint, alleging violations of anti-discrimination statutes including the Age Discrimination in Employment Act ("ADEA") and Michigan's Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act, was necessitated by his discriminatory and retaliatory termination by Fitness USA on account of his age (56 years old).

Breach of Employment Agreement

Case filed on behalf of former President and CEO of Battle Creek Health Systems who was employed pursuant to a written employment contract. Following transition into another role with the employer, client was discharged without cause. In violation of client's employment agreement, employer has refused to comply with its contractual obligation to provide certain severance benefits.

Breach of Employment Agreement/Disability Discrimination/Violation of the Family Medical Leave Act

Client was the employer's CEO and was employed pursuant to a written employment contract. Due to a chronic back condition, client was required to take leave in order to receive treatment and recover. Client's condition required her to use a cane or walker to ambulate. In addition, client required leave to care for a family member who had been diagnosed with cancer. Without warning, client was discharged without just cause. Employer has refused to pay client the benefits due under her employment contract.

Wrong Discharge Lawsuits

Public Policy
On June 17, 2011, Sommers Schwartz attorneys Daniel Swanson and Jesse Young filed a wrongful discharge lawsuit on behalf of their client, a licensed pharmacist, as against Walgreen Co. The Plaintiff's complaint alleges that Walgreens wrongfully terminated him after he exercised his right to self-defense when armed robbers entered the Benton Harbor, Michigan store on May 8, 2011 and threatened his life and the lives of three co-workers. After a robber jumped the pharmacy counter and pointed a gun directly at the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff drew his concealed weapon (for which he had a valid Michigan license) and was successfully able to fend off the robbers so that no one was hurt and no money or goods were stolen from the store. Eight days after the Plaintiff successfully saved his own life and the lives of three co-workers, Walgreens terminated his employment. The complaint claims that the Plaintiff was exercising his constitutional and statutory rights to carry a concealed weapon and to defend himself and others. The lawsuit was filed pursuant to a Michigan law that protects employees from retaliation by their employers when the employee exercises a legal right. The lawsuit is currently pending in the Berrien County Circuit Court. Read more.

Whistle Blower
On March 1, 2011, Sommers Schwartz attorneys Daniel Swanson and Jesse Young filed a wrongful discharge lawsuit on behalf of their client, the former Chief Financial Officer, as against Inteva products, LLC. Plaintiff's complaint alleges that Inteva wrongfully discharged him because he "blew the whistle" on his employer for entering into a fraudulent loan transaction with a supplier. The complaint claims that the loan violated statutory lending laws and the CFO was duty bound to call the loan to the attention of the proper authorities. The lawsuit was filed pursuant to a Michigan law that protects employees from retaliation by their employees when wrongful or illegal conduct is reported. After the Plaintiff uncovered the fraudulent loan and notified outside auditors and others of the illegal activity, Inteva terminated his employment. The law suit is currently pending in he Oakland County Circuit Court.

Breach of employment contracts
On July 7, 2010, Judge Sean Cox of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, granted summary judgment in favor of the Firm's clients in Holbrook et al. v. GenTek, Inc., Case No. 08-12179. In connection with the Holbrook litigation, the Firm's business litigation group represents six Plaintiffs who previously served as executives for the Defendant GenTek. Upon GenTek's 2007 sale of Plaintiffs' business unit, GenTek failed and refused to pay Plaintiffs' performance awards as mandated by written contracts entered into between the Plaintiffs and the company. By way of its July 7, 2010 ruling, the Court determined that Plaintiffs were entitled to the performance awards (exceeding a cumulative amount of $305,000), and that the Defendant's defenses were without merit.

Unlawful Retaliatory Termination
On September 24, 2010 Sommers Schwartz attorney Kevin J. Stoops and Daniel D. Swanson filed a lawsuit on behalf of their client, a former custodial worker, against Southgate School District in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan ( Scamp v. Southgate Community School District, Case No. 10-13819). Plaintiffs' Complaint, alleging violations of anti-discrimination statutes including Title VII and Michigan's Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act, was necessitated by her discriminatory and retaliatory termination by Southgate School District. Specifically, Plaintiff's employment was terminated after she filed complaints with the School District about her supervisor engaging in illegal sexual harassment including making illegal sexual contact on two separate occasions.

Age Discrimination Resulting in Unlawful Termination
On September 28, 2010 Sommers Schwartz attorneys Kevin J. Stoops and Daniel D. Swanson filed a lawsuit on behalf of their client, a former Vice-President with an exemplary 36 year employment history, against Fitness USA (along with its owner and Chief Executive Officer) in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan ( Kulka v. Fitness USA, et al., Case No. 10-13863). Plaintiffs' Complaint, alleging violations of anti-discrimination statutes including the Age Discrimination in Employment Act ("ADEA") and Michigan's Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act, was necessitated by his discriminatory and retaliatory termination by Fitness USA on account of his age (56 years old).

Breach of Employment Agreement
Case filed on behalf of former President and CEO of Battle Creek Health Systems who was employed pursuant to a written employment contract. Following transition into another role with the employer, client was discharged without cause. In violation of client's employment agreement, employer has refused to comply with its contractual obligation to provide certain severance benefits.

Breach of Employment Agreement/Disability Discrimination/Violation of the Family Medical Leave Act
Client was the employer's CEO and was employed pursuant to a written employment contract. Due to a chronic back condition, client was required to take leave in order to receive treatment and recover. Client's condition required her to use a cane or walker to ambulate. In addition, client required leave to care for a family member who had been diagnosed with cancer. Without warning, client was discharged without just cause. Employer has refused to pay client the benefits due under her employment contract.