D.W. v. Bay Water LLC

CourtDistrict Court, E.D. Tennessee
DecidedJune 18, 2025
Docket1:24-cv-00082
StatusUnknown

This text of D.W. v. Bay Water LLC (D.W. v. Bay Water LLC) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Tennessee primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
D.W. v. Bay Water LLC, (E.D. Tenn. 2025).

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE

D.W., by next of friend and mother CLARISSA BROWN, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No.: 1:24-cv-82-TAV-CHS ) BAY WATER, LLC, ) ) Defendant. )

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This civil action is before the Court on plaintiff’s Motion for Entry of Default Judgment Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(2) [Doc. 18]. For the reasons set forth below, plaintiff’s motion [Doc. 18] will be GRANTED. I. Background The Court takes as true the factual allegations in the complaint. Bogard v. Nat’l Credit Consultants, No. 1:12-CV-2509, 2013 WL 2209154, at *3 (N.D. Ohio May 20, 2013). Defendant owns and operates a restaurant called DosBros Fresh Mexican Grill, located in Chattanooga, Tennessee [Doc. 1 ¶ 3]. Plaintiff is a minor, who is 16 years old, and Clarissa Brown is plaintiff’s custodial parent [Id. ¶¶ 4–5].1 Plaintiff was employed by defendant as a dishwasher at the restaurant from approximately July 2023 to December 29, 2023 [Id. ¶ 6]. Defendant agreed to pay plaintiff a specific hourly rate for his work, but failed to pay plaintiff Any compensation for his last two weeks of employment [Id. ¶¶ 7–8].

1 Although he was 16 years old at the time of the complaint, plaintiff is now 17 years old [See Doc. 18-1 ¶ 1]. Plaintiff repeatedly asked defendant to pay him for his last two weeks of work, but defendant refused to pay [Id. ¶ 10]. Plaintiff filed this action on February 23, 2024, alleging violation of the Fair Labor

Standards Act (“FLSA”) for failure to pay plaintiff a minimum wage of at least $7.25 an hour for the hours he worked during his final two workweeks [Id. ¶¶ 16–17]. Plaintiff seeks back pay and an equal amount of liquidated damages [Id. ¶¶ 18–19]. Plaintiff also alleges a claim for breach of contract [Id. ¶¶ 21–24]. On March 7, 2024, plaintiff filed the summons returned executed as to defendant

[Doc. 7]. On August 5, 2024, plaintiff applied to the Clerk of Court for an entry of default as to defendant because it failed to respond or otherwise defend in this action [Docs. 9, 10], and the Clerk entered default on September 26, 2024 [Doc. 12]. Plaintiff now seeks a default judgment against defendant [Doc. 18]. II. Analysis

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55 “contemplates a two-step process for obtaining a default judgment against a defendant who has failed to plead or otherwise defend.” Banner Life Ins. Co. v. Columbia State Bank, No. 3:19-CV-119, 2020 WL 3977635, at *1 (E.D. Tenn. July 14, 2020). “First, pursuant to Rule 55(a), a plaintiff must request from the Clerk of Court an entry of default, describing the particulars of the defendant’s failure

to plead or otherwise defend.” Id. If the clerk enters default, “the plaintiff must then move the Court for entry of default judgment pursuant to Rule 55(b).” Id. Pursuant to Rule 55(b), a default can be entered by the Clerk “[i]f the plaintiff’s claim is for a sum certain 2 or a sum that can be made certain by computation[.]” Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(1). But “[i]n all other cases, the party must apply to the court for a default judgment.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(2).

Proceeding under Rule 55(b)(2), after the Clerk has entered default, the court must take the complaint’s factual allegations as true. Bogard, 2013 WL 2209154, at *3. However, the Court must determine whether the factual allegations “are sufficient to state a claim for relief as to [the] cause of action for which the plaintiff seeks default judgment.” J & J Sports Prods., Inc. v. Rodriguez, No. 1:08-CV-1350, 2008 WL 5083149, at *1 (N.D.

Ohio Nov. 25, 2008) (citation omitted). Although the Court takes factual allegations regarding liability as true, the plaintiff must prove the amount of damages. Bogard, 2013 WL 2209154, at *3. A. Sufficiency of the Complaint Plaintiff alleges defendant is liable under the FLSA for failure to pay a minimum

wage. “Congress passed the FLSA with broad remedial intent.” Keller v. Miri Microsystems, LLC, 781 F.3d 799, 806 (6th Cir. 2015). “The FLSA requires employers to pay employees engaged in commerce a wage consistent with the minimum wage[.]” Id. (internal quotation marks and alterations omitted). Currently, that minimum wage is $7.25 per hour. Crowell v. M Street Entertainment, LLC, 670 F. Supp. 3d 563, 581 (M.D. Tenn.

2023) (citing 29 U.S.C. § 206(a)(1)(C)). An employer violates § 206 of the FLSA “when it fails to pay a minimum-wage worker for the full number of hours []he worked in a timely manner.” Athan v. United States Steel, 364 F. Supp. 3d 748, 753 (E.D. Mich. 2019). 3 “Under the FLSA, only employees are entitled to . . . minimum-wage compensation.” Keller, 781 F.3d at 806. The FLSA defines an “employee” as “any individual employed by an employer.” Id. at 807 (quoting 29 U.S.C. § 203(e)(1)). The

Sixth Circuit has interpreted “employees” within the FLSA to mean “those who as a matter of economic reality are dependent upon the business to which they render service.” Id. (quoting Brandel, 736 F.2d at 1116). Here, plaintiff has alleged that he was employed by defendant as a dishwasher in its Chattanooga restaurant [Doc. 1 ¶ 6]. Plaintiff alleges that defendant was an “employer”

within the meaning of § 203(d) of the FLSA, and plaintiff was an “employee” within the meaning of § 203(e)(1) of the FLSA [Id. ¶¶ 11–12]. And, plaintiff alleges, defendant failed to pay him any compensation for the hours he worked during his last two weeks of his employment with defendant [Id. ¶¶ 8–9, 17]. Consequently, the Court finds that the complaint sufficiently alleges that defendant violated the FLSA by failing to pay him a

minimum wage for the final two weeks of his employment. Plaintiff also raises a state law claim of breach of contract. “In Tennessee, the essential elements of a breach of contract claim are as follows: (1) the existence of an enforceable contract, (2) nonperformance amounting to a breach of the contract, and (3) damages caused by the breach of the contract.” McClanahan v. State Farm Life Ins.

Co., 660 F. Supp. 3d 728, 737 (W.D. Tenn. Mar. 9, 2023). Plaintiff has alleged that defendant agreed to pay him a specific hourly rate for his work [Doc. 1 ¶ 7], and that such agreement was an enforceable contract under Tennessee 4 law [Id. ¶ 22]. Plaintiff alleges that defendant thereafter failed to pay him any compensation for the final two weeks of his employment, in breach of that agreement [Id. ¶¶ 8–9, 23]. Moreover, plaintiff alleges that he sustained damages through the loss of

compensation for hours worked [Id. ¶ 24]. The Court finds that the complaint sufficiently alleges that defendant breached a contract with plaintiff by failure to pay him any compensation for hours worked during his final two weeks of employment. B. Damages Turning to the appropriate remedy, plaintiff seeks back pay/lost wages and

liquidated damages.2 Although the Court must take as true the factual allegations regarding liability in the complaint, plaintiff must prove the appropriate amount of damages. Bogard, 2013 WL 2209154, at *3. In determining damages, “[t]he Court may rely on affidavits [and other materials] . . .

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Michael Keller v. Miri Microsystems LLC
781 F.3d 799 (Sixth Circuit, 2015)
Athan v. U.S. Steel
364 F. Supp. 3d 748 (E.D. Michigan, 2019)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
D.W. v. Bay Water LLC, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dw-v-bay-water-llc-tned-2025.