Plaintiffs Jose Gonzalez Gomez and others sued defendants Epic Landscape Productions, L.C., Epic Landscape Productions, Inc., John Constant, and Marty Siller in the United States District Court for the District of Kansas raising claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), Missouri Minimum Wage Law (MMWL), breach of contract, third-party beneficiary, and unjust enrichment. Defendants moved for partial judgment on the pleadings under Rule 12(c).
Factual Overview
Plaintiffs are current and former lawn and landscape workers who were hourly employees of the defendants. They allege that the defendants willfully failed to pay overtime compensation in violation of the FLSA and state law. The plaintiffs include both H-2B workers and U.S. citizen workers.
On May 30, 2022, the plaintiffs filed this putative collective and class action. The court conditionally certified Count I as an FLSA collective action on April 28, 2023. Defendants now seek dismissal of Counts II-V, which include claims under the MMWL, breach of contract for H-2B workers, third-party beneficiary claims for U.S. citizen workers, and unjust enrichment.
Legal Analysis
Missouri Minimum Wage Law Claim: Defendants argued that the FLSA preempts the MMWL claim. The court rejected this argument, distinguishing cases involving the Kansas Wage Payment Act and noting that numerous courts have allowed MMWL claims to proceed alongside FLSA claims.
Breach of Contract: Defendants contended that the H-2B applications do not create an enforceable contract with workers. The court found that the weight of authority supports the plaintiffs’ position that the legal obligations in H-2B applications can be incorporated into employment contracts.
Third Party Beneficiary Claim: Defendants argued that the plaintiffs failed to allege a valid contract or that the contracting parties intended to benefit non-H-2B employees. The court found these arguments undeveloped and premature at this stage of the litigation.
Equitable Relief: Defendants asserted that the unjust enrichment claim fails because a valid contract exists. The court allowed this claim to proceed as an alternative theory of recovery, noting that it may provide relief beyond what is available under the FLSA or state law.
The court denied the defendants’ motion for partial judgment on the pleadings, allowing all claims to proceed.
Schrag on Law 