Larry Dowdy v. WRD Global LLC, American Business Consultants LLC, and Douglas Harding

No. CV-25-00990-PHX-DJH (D. Ariz. Mar. 25, 2026) · United States District Court for the District of Arizona · March 25, 2026 · No. 2:25-cv-00990

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of Arizona grants in part and denies in part Larry Dowdy’s motion for default judgment against WRD Global LLC, American Business Consultants LLC, and Douglas Harding. The court finds that Dowdy sufficiently stated claims for unpaid wages and overtime under the FLSA, AMWA, and AWA, but concludes that Harding is not individually liable under the AWA. Judgment is entered for $16,480.00 against WRD and ABC, with Harding jointly and severally liable for $10,300.00, plus post-judgment interest.

Holdings

  1. Default judgment is appropriate because six of the seven Eitel factors favor entry of default judgment against defendants.
  2. Plaintiff sufficiently stated claims for unpaid minimum and overtime wages under the FLSA by alleging employee status, FLSA coverage, and failure to pay wages for four workweeks.
  3. Plaintiff sufficiently stated a claim under the AMWA by alleging he was not paid the applicable Arizona minimum wage of $14.70 per hour for approximately four workweeks.
  4. Plaintiff stated a plausible AWA claim against WRD and ABC but not against Douglas Harding individually, because the AWA's narrow definition of 'employer' does not authorize individual liability against owners, officers, and directors of a corporate employer for wholesale failure to pay wages.
  5. Plaintiff is entitled to $16,480.00 in total damages: $15,000.00 in trebled unpaid wages under the AWA and $1,480.00 in doubled liquidated overtime damages under the FLSA, plus post-judgment interest at 4.08% per annum. Harding is jointly and severally liable for $10,300.00 of that sum.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether default judgment should be entered against defendants under the Eitel factors
  2. Whether plaintiff stated plausible claims for unpaid overtime and minimum wages under the FLSA
  3. Whether plaintiff stated a plausible claim for unpaid minimum wages under the AMWA
  4. Whether plaintiff stated a plausible claim for unpaid wages under the AWA, including against defendant Harding individually
  5. What damages plaintiff is entitled to recover

Disposition

other

Cases Cited (30)

  • Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470 (9th Cir. 1986)(followed)
  • Geddes v. United Fin. Grp., 559 F.2d 557 (9th Cir. 1977)(followed)
  • Aldabe v. Aldabe, 616 F.2d 1089 (9th Cir. 1980)(followed)
  • Fair Hous. of Marin v. Combs, 285 F.3d 899 (9th Cir. 2002)(followed)
  • Cripps v. Life Ins. Co. of N. Am., 980 F.2d 1261 (9th Cir. 1992)(followed)
  • PepsiCo, Inc. v. Cal. Sec. Cans, 238 F. Supp. 2d 1172 (C.D. Cal. 2002)(followed)
  • Shanghai Automation Instrument Co. v. Kuei, 194 F. Supp. 2d 995 (N.D. Cal. 2001)(followed)
  • Vietnam Reform Party v. Viet Tan - Vietnam Reform Party, 416 F. Supp. 3d 948 (N.D. Cal. 2019)(followed)
  • Smith v. Nov. Bar N Grill LLC, 441 F. Supp. 3d 830 (D. Ariz. 2020)(followed)
  • Avila v. JBL Cleaning Servs. LLC, 2024 WL 863710 (D. Ariz. Feb. 29, 2024)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 30.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…