Exeter finance corporation Pc#

Plaintiffs did not oppose Defendant’s Motion to Compel Arbitration and Stay proceedings, reserving Plaintiffs’ rights to invalidate the arbitration agreements for unconscionability following the completion of arbitration pursuant to the agreements between, as noted, 20 of the Opt-In Plaintiffs subject to such agreements and Defendant however, Plaintiff requested the case proceed with the 16 Opt-In Plaintiffs who had not executed such agreements. 38) (“Plaintiffs’ Motion to Substitute Denise Gorgone as Named Plaintiff”). 35) (“Plaintiffs’ Motion to Substitute Kenneth Fischer as Named Plaintiff”) Plaintiffs’ Motion To Amend The Complaint to Substitute The Named Plaintiff, filed J(Dkt. 32) (“Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss”) Plaintiffs’ Motion To Amend The Complaint To Substitute The Named Plaintiff filed (Dkt. 14) (“Defendant’s Motion to Compel Arbitration and Stay”) Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, filed Ap(Dkt. 7) (“Plaintiffs’ Motion to Expedite”) Defendant’s Motion To Compel Arbitration and Stay This Action, filed Aug2 (Dkt. 4), filed July 17, 2015) (“Plaintiffs’ Motion for Certification and Notice”) Plaintiffs’ Motion To Expedite Motion For Expedited Notice Pursuant To The Fair Labor Standards Act, also filed July 17, 2015, (Dkt. Also pending are Plaintiffs’ Motion For Conditional Certification And Expedited Notice Pursuant To The FLSA (Dkt. 47) (“Plaintiffs’ Motion”) and Defendant’s cross-motion requesting the case be transferred to the Northern District of Texas (Dkt. § 1404(a) (“§ 1404(a)”), to transfer this action to the Southern District of New York (Dkt. Pending before the court are Plaintiffs’ motion, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Defendant, previously a Texas corporation and, since 2017, a Delaware corporation, is a national provider of sub-prime auto loans with its principal place of business in Irving, Texas, within the Northern District of Texas Plaintiffs were employed as underwriters, credit analysts, credit managers, senior credit managers and assistant area general managers, who evaluated applicants for Defendant’s loan products based on Defendant’s credit criteria. 15 at 9-10), Gorgone and the 16 other Opt-In Plaintiffs did not execute any such arbitration agreements with Defendant. Unlike Plaintiff and 20 of the Opt-In Plaintiffs, who had executed general arbitration agreements with Defendant covering the claims alleged in the instant action (Dkt. 1 ¶ 23) and one Opt-In Plaintiff, Denise Gorgone, resided and was employed by Defendant in Westchester, New York, in the Southern District of New York (Dkt. Plaintiff resided in this district but was employed by Defendant at Defendant’s office located in Albany, New York in the Northern District of New York (Dkt. Labor Law and those of various states in which 36 Opt1 In Plaintiffs resided and were employed by Defendant (Dkt. § 1367, a class-action based on Defendant’s violations of applicable provisions of the N.Y. Plaintiffs also allege, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 216(b) (“§ 216(b)”), Defendant misclassified Plaintiffs as exempt from the FLSA’s overtime, in excess of 40 hours per week, pay requirements and failed to compensate Plaintiffs for such overtime at the FLSA’s statutory rate of time and one-half per hour of overtime. 2) (“Opt-In Plaintiffs”) (collectively “Plaintiffs”), as permitted by 29 U.S.C. (“FLSA”), Plaintiff alleges on behalf of himself and 36 similarly situated optin Plaintiffs who have filed consents to join the action as parties (Dkt. CITRON, AARON WARSHAW, of Counsel 599 Lexington Avenue, 17th Floor New York, New York 10022 In this action, pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, 29 U.S.C.

Exeter finance corporation Pc#

LINGLE, of Counsel 693 East Avenue Rochester, New York 14607 OGLETREE DEAKINS NASH SMOAK & STEWART, PC Attorneys for Defendant EVAN V. _ APPEARANCES: THOMAS & SOLOMON, LLP Attorneys for Plaintiff JONATHAN W.

15-CV-632A(F) EXETER FINANCE CORP., Defendant. 64 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK _ BRADLEY GOLDOWSKY, on behalf of himself and all other similarly situated, DECISION and ORDER Plaintiff, v.