Sampson v. Knight Transportation, Inc

W.D. Washington

Sampson v. Knight Transportation, Inc

DecidedMarch 3, 2020

Docket2:17-cv-00028

StatusUnknown

This text of Sampson v. Knight Transportation, Inc (Sampson v. Knight Transportation, Inc) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Washington primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Sampson v. Knight Transportation, Inc, (W.D. Wash. 2020).

Pincite

Opinion

THE HONORABLE JOHN C. COUGHENOUR 1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 8 AT SEATTLE 9 VALERIE SAMPSON and DAVID CASE NO. C17-0028-JCC RAYMOND, on their own behalf and on the 10 behalf of all others similarly situated, MINUTE ORDER 11 Plaintiffs, 12 v. 13 KNIGHT TRANSPORTATION, INC. et al., 14 Defendants. 15

16 The following Minute Order is made by direction of the Court, the Honorable John C. 17 Coughenour, United States District Judge: 18 This matter comes before the Court pursuant to the parties’ joint status report (Dkt. No. 19 106). On June 14, 2018, the Court certified the following question to the Washington Supreme 20 Court: “Does the Washington Minimum Wage Act require non-agricultural employers to pay 21 their piece-rate employees per hour for time spent performing activities outside of piece-rate 22 work?” (Dkt. No. 92 at 17.) The Washington Supreme Court has answered the certified question 23 “no.” See Sampson v. Knight Transportation, Inc., 448 P.3d 9, 11 (2019). There is a pending 24 motion for class certification before the Court that has been fully briefed. (See Dkt. Nos. 52, 70, 25 77, 79, 82, and 83.) Defendants request leave to submit additional briefing to address both the 26 Washington Supreme Court decision and additional caselaw that bears on certification of the 1 remaining issues in the case. (Dkt. No. 106 at 2.) Finding good cause, the Court GRANTS 2 Defendants’ request and ORDERS as follows: 3 1. The Court LIFTS its stay of this action. 4 2. Defendants may submit a supplemental brief addressing the Washington Supreme 5 Court decision and any new relevant legal authority issued after the close of the class 6 certification briefing. Defendants’ supplemental brief shall not exceed five pages and 7 is due on March 18, 2020. 8 3. Plaintiffs’ response to Defendants’ shall not exceed five pages and is due on March 9 25, 2020. 10 4. Plaintiffs’ motion for class certification (Dkt. No. 52) is RENOTED for March 25, 11 2020. 12 DATED this 3rd day of March 2020. 13 William M. McCool Clerk of Court 14 s/Tomas Hernandez 15 Deputy Clerk 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

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

THE HONORABLE JOHN C. COUGHENOUR 1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 8 AT SEATTLE 9 VALERIE SAMPSON and DAVID CASE NO. C17-0028-JCC RAYMOND, on their own behalf and on the 10 behalf of all others similarly situated, MINUTE ORDER 11 Plaintiffs, 12 v. 13 KNIGHT TRANSPORTATION, INC. et al., 14 Defendants. 15

16 The following Minute Order is made by direction of the Court, the Honorable John C. 17 Coughenour, United States District Judge: 18 This matter comes before the Court pursuant to the parties’ joint status report (Dkt. No. 19 106). On June 14, 2018, the Court certified the following question to the Washington Supreme 20 Court: “Does the Washington Minimum Wage Act require non-agricultural employers to pay 21 their piece-rate employees per hour for time spent performing activities outside of piece-rate 22 work?” (Dkt. No. 92 at 17.) The Washington Supreme Court has answered the certified question 23 “no.” See Sampson v. Knight Transportation, Inc., 448 P.3d 9, 11 (2019). There is a pending 24 motion for class certification before the Court that has been fully briefed. (See Dkt. Nos. 52, 70, 25 77, 79, 82, and 83.) Defendants request leave to submit additional briefing to address both the 26 Washington Supreme Court decision and additional caselaw that bears on certification of the 1 remaining issues in the case. (Dkt. No. 106 at 2.) Finding good cause, the Court GRANTS 2 Defendants’ request and ORDERS as follows: 3 1. The Court LIFTS its stay of this action. 4 2. Defendants may submit a supplemental brief addressing the Washington Supreme 5 Court decision and any new relevant legal authority issued after the close of the class 6 certification briefing. Defendants’ supplemental brief shall not exceed five pages and 7 is due on March 18, 2020. 8 3. Plaintiffs’ response to Defendants’ shall not exceed five pages and is due on March 9 25, 2020. 10 4. Plaintiffs’ motion for class certification (Dkt. No. 52) is RENOTED for March 25, 11 2020. 12 DATED this 3rd day of March 2020. 13 William M. McCool Clerk of Court 14 s/Tomas Hernandez 15 Deputy Clerk 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Sampson v. Knight Transportation, Inc, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sampson-v-knight-transportation-inc-wawd-2020.