Lola v. Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom Llp

620 Fed.Appx. 37 (2nd Cir. 2015)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

P alleged that Ds were joint employers within the meaning of FLSA. P, a North Carolina resident, worked for Ds for fifteen months in North Carolina. He conducted document review for Skadden (D) in connection with a multi-district litigation in Ohio. P is an attorney licensed to practice law in California, but he is not admitted to practice law in either North Carolina or the Northern District of Ohio. P's work was closely supervised by ds, and his 'entire responsibility . . . consisted of (a) looking at documents to see what search terms, if any, appeared in the documents, (b) marking those documents into the categories predetermined by Ds, and (c) at times drawing black boxes to redact portions of certain documents based on specific protocols that Ds provided.' Ds provided him with the documents he reviewed, the search terms he was to use in connection with those documents, and the procedures he was to follow if the search terms appeared. Lola was paid $25 an hour for his work and worked roughly forty-five to fifty-five hours a week. He was paid at the same rate for any hours he worked in excess of forty hours per week. P was told that he was an employee of Tower (D), but he was also told that he needed to follow any procedures set by Skadden (D) attorneys. P worked under the supervision of Skadden (P) attorneys. Other attorneys employed to work on the same project performed similar work and were paid hourly at the same rate even in excess of forty hours per week. Ds moved to dismiss arguing that P was exempt from overtime rules because he was a licensed attorney engaged in the practice of law. The district court found that state, not federal, standards applied in determining whether an attorney was practicing law under FLSA. It held that North Carolina's law should apply and P was engaged in the practice of law as defined by North Carolina and was therefore an exempt employee under FLSA. P appealed.