A Florida employee decided that he and others in similar jobs had not been paid the proper amount of overtime by their employer. So he sued on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, seeking both overdue pay and damages.

What happened. “Dunne” worked for Floormasters Enterprises as a warehouse clerk for about 9 weeks in 2007. When his suit got to federal district court, Floormasters moved quickly. It first filed a motion that denied its liability for unpaid overtime but offering Dunne $637.98 as full payment for overtime and damages. Dunne responded that he was actually owed $3,000.

Less than 2 weeks later, Floormasters, still denying its liability, tendered Dunne a check for $3,000—$1,500 in unpaid overtime and $1,500 in liquidated damages. That turned out to be a very smart move. The employer then asked the district judge to dismiss Dunne’s case; arguing that because he had received the payment he sought before any judgment was made, the court no longer had jurisdiction. The judge agreed and dismissed the case. Because Dunne still wanted reimbursement for his attorney, which is available to plaintiffs under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), he appealed to the 11th Circuit, which covers Alabama, Florida, and Georgia.

What the court said. Appellate judges issued a decision that’s good news for employers: They agreed with the district judge that because Floormasters had paid Dunne everything he said he was owed, the employer had, in effect, made the case go away. Only if the district court had issued a judgment against Floormasters would Dunne also have been able to collect his attorney’s fees. Note that the same privilege is not available to employers under FLSA: If the judge had ruled against Dunne, Floormasters would not have been able to win back its attorney’s fees. Dionne v. Floormasters, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit, No. 09-15405 (7/28/11).

Points to remember: Employers facing overtime suits should ask the court for sworn estimates of the amounts plaintiffs are seeking as soon as possible in discovery, and pay those amounts promptly, at the same time denying that the employer actually owes those amounts. The suits then become moot, and judges, at least in the 11th Circuit, are not likely to seek attorney’s fees for the plaintiffs.

Furthermore, an appellate judge from the 9th Circuit wrote the opinion in this case, so his views may prevail throughout that much larger circuit. Another advantage of Floormasters’s quick payoff was that the plaintiff hadn’t yet sought certification of a class of warehouse clerks employed by the company in the past 3 years. Again, Floormasters saved money.