Tamesha Brewer v. Mbroh Engineering, Inc. and Anthony Mbroh

Summary

The United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas denied Defendants’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment in an overtime-pay dispute. The Court struck a supplemental expert report and the appendix filed with Defendants’ reply because Defendants had not obtained leave to file new reply evidence and Plaintiff lacked a meaningful opportunity to respond. The Court concluded that genuine disputes of material fact remained regarding the overtime hours Plaintiff allegedly worked and the amount of overtime pay owed.

Holdings

1. A party must obtain leave of court before filing an appendix with a reply, and the court may strike or decline to consider new evidentiary materials submitted without leave when the nonmovant lacked a meaningful opportunity to respond.
2. Defendants were not entitled to partial summary judgment because they failed to establish the absence of a genuine dispute of material fact concerning the number of overtime hours Plaintiff allegedly worked and the amount of overtime pay she may be owed.
3. The court did not consider the declarations in deciding the summary-judgment motion, so Defendants' objections were overruled as moot without prejudice to renewal if the declarations were later presented or offered.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Defendants' supplemental expert report and accompanying reply appendix should be considered when Defendants filed them without obtaining leave of court and Plaintiff lacked a meaningful opportunity to respond.
2. Whether Defendants were entitled to partial summary judgment because Plaintiff allegedly lacked competent evidence creating a genuine dispute regarding the overtime hours she worked and the overtime compensation owed.
3. Whether Plaintiff should receive leave to file a late Daubert motion after the challenged supplemental report was struck.

Disposition

other