M. H. Fox v. Tyson Foods, Inc., 11th Cir. Mar. 12, 2008

07-11852 M. H. Fox v. Tyson Foods, Inc.
Before HULL and PRYOR, Circuit Judges, and MOORE, ((Honorable K. Michael Moore, U.S. District Judge for the Southern District of Florida,
sitting by designation.)) District Judge.
PRYOR, Circuit Judge: The main issue in this appeal is whether a district court must allow litigants to intervene in an action based only on a speculative concern about the stare decisis effect of a decision in that action. Petitioners, 161 employees or former employees of the Tyson Foods, Inc., plant in Blountsville, Alabama, appeal the denial of their motion to intervene in an action filed by M.H. Fox, an employee of the Tyson plant in Albertville, Alabama. The petitioners allege that Tyson violated the Fair Labor Standards Act by not compensating them for time spent donning and doffing—putting on, taking off, cleaning, and stowing—safety and sanitary gear. The petitioners make three arguments on appeal: (1) the district court clearly erred when it found that Tyson did not have a single, company-wide policy about compensation for donning and doffing; (2) the district court erred when it denied intervention of right; and (3) the district court abused its discretion when it denied permissive intervention. Because the district court did not err when it denied intervention of right and did not abuse its discretion when it denied permissive intervention, we dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction. … M. H. Fox v. Tyson Foods, Inc..

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.