Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Acosta v. Irish Heart Enterprises, LLC

United States District Court, W.D. Wisconsin

April 13, 2018

R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA, Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor, Plaintiff,
v.
IRISH HEART ENTERPRISES, LLC d/b/a THE BRASS RING, LAWRENCE WALSH, individually, and HEATHER WALSH, individually, Defendants.

          Irish Heart Enterprises, LLC, Lowrance Walsh, Heather Walsh Attorney for Defendants

          KATE S. O'SCANNLAIN Solicitor of Labor, CHRISTINE Z. HERI Regional Solicitor Lindsey Rothfeder Attorneys for R. Alexander Acosta, Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor, Plaintiff

          CONSENT JUDGMENT

         Plaintiff, R. Alexander Acosta, Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor, having filed his complaint and defendants, Irish Heart Enterprises, LLC d/b/a the Brass Ring, Lawrence Walsh, individually, and Heather Walsh, individually, (collectively "defendants"), having appeared by counsel, having waived service, and having been duly advised in the premises, agree to the entry of this judgment without contest under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, as Amended, (29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq.) (hereinafter "the Act").

         Defendants hereby admit and the Court finds the corporate defendant Irish Heart Enterprises, LLC is and, at all times hereinafter mentioned, was an enterprise engaged in commerce within the meaning of 29 U.S.C. §§ 203(r), 203(s)(1)(A).

         Defendants hereby admit and the Court finds individual defendant Lawrence Walsh is and, at all times hereinafter mentioned, was an individual "employer" under 29 U.S.C. § 203(d).

         Defendants hereby admit and the Court finds individual defendant Heather Walsh is and, at all times hereinafter mentioned, was an individual "employer" under 29 U.S.C. § 203(d).

         Defendants hereby admit and the Court finds defendants did not always comply with the overtiime payment requirements of 29 U.S.C. § 207.

         Defendants hereby admit and the Court finds defendants did not comply with the requirements of 29 U.S.C. § 2O3(m) insofar as Defendants required tipped employees to share their tips with non-tipped employees.

         NOW, therefore upon motion of attorneys for plaintiff and defendants, and for cause shown, JUDGMENT IS HEREBY ENTERED against defendants pursuant to sections 16(c) and 17 of the Act as follows.

         IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED, pursuant to section 17 of the Act, that the defendants, their officers, agents, servants, employees, and all persons in active concert or participation with them be, and they hereby are, permanently enjoined and restrained from violating the provisions of the Act, in any of the following manners.

         I

         Defendants shall not, contrary to sections 6 and 15(a)(2) of the Act, pay any of their employees who in any workweek are engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce or who are employed in an enterprise engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce, within the meaning of the Act, wages at a rate less than $7.25 per hour (or at a rate less than such other applicable minimum rate as may hereinafter be established by amendment to the Act). If defendants apply a tip credit, defendants shall comply with all requirements of 29 U.S.C. § 203(m).

         II

         Defendants shall not, contrary to sections 7 and 15(a)(2) of the Act, employ any of then-employees who in any workweek are engaged in commerce or the production of goods for commerce, or who are employed in an enterprise engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce, within the meaning of the Act, for workweeks longer than forty hours, unless such employee receives compensation for his employment ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.