[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT FILED
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
May 23, 2008
No. 07-14569 THOMAS K. KAHN
CLERK
D. C. Docket No. 06-02150 CV-LSC-W
PENNY ALLEN,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
DOLGENCORP, INC.,
DOLLAR GENERAL PARTNERS,
DOLGENCORP OF NEW YORK, INC.,
DOLGENCORP OF TEXAS, INC.,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 07-14570
D. C. Docket No. 06-02160 CV-LSC-W
BERYL DAUZAT,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
DOLGENCORP, INC.,
DOLLAR GENERAL PARTNERS,
DOLGENCORP OF NEW YORK, INC.,
DOLGENCORP OF TEXAS, INC.,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 07-14571
D. C. Docket No. 06-02164 CV-LSC-W
DEBORAH FRANCIS,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
DOLGENCORP, INC.,
DOLLAR GENERAL PARTNERS,
DOLGENCORP OF NEW YORK, INC.,
DOLGENCORP OF TEXAS, INC.,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 07-14572
D. C. Docket No. 06-02165 CV-LSC-W
2
REGINA FRANKLIN,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
DOLGENCORP, INC.,
DOLLAR GENERAL PARTNERS,
DOLGENCORP OF NEW YORK, INC.,
DOLGENCORP OF TEXAS, INC.,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 07-14573
D. C. Docket No. 06-02171 CV-LSC-W
MICHAEL HADAWAY,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
DOLGENCORP, INC.,
DOLLAR GENERAL PARTNERS,
DOLGENCORP OF NEW YORK, INC.,
DOLGENCORP OF TEXAS, INC.,
Defendants-Appellees.
3
No. 07-14574
D. C. Docket No. 06-02204 CV-LSC-W
CATHY THOMAS,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
DOLGENCORP, INC.,
DOLLAR GENERAL PARTNERS,
DOLGENCORP OF NEW YORK, INC.,
DOLGENCORP OF TEXAS, INC.,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 07-14575
D. C. Docket No. 06-02213 CV-LSC-W
WANDA WOMACK,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
DOLGENCORP, INC.,
DOLLAR GENERAL PARTNERS,
4
DOLGENCORP OF NEW YORK, INC.,
DOLGENCORP OF TEXAS, INC.,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeals from the United States District Court
for the Northern District Of Alabama
(May 23, 2008)
Before DUBINA and BARKETT, Circuit Judges, and SCHLESINGER*, District
Judge.
PER CURIAM:
Appellants are store managers of a number of Dollar General stores in
Alabama. They appeal the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of
Appellee Dolgencorp, Inc. (“Dollar General”), on Appellants’ claims under the
Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 2001-2019.
The question before us is whether there is a genuine issue of material fact as
to whether the Appellants’ primary duty was management. At the time the district
court granted summary judgment in this case, the court did not have the benefit of
our recent decision in Rodriguez v. Farm Stores Grocery, Inc., ___ F.3d ___, 2008
*
Honorable Harvey E. Schlesinger, United States District Judge for the Middle District of
Florida, sitting by designation.
5
WL 601845 at *4 (11th Cir. 2008). Our holding in Rodriguez could affect the
outcome of the present case. Accordingly, we vacate the district court’s grant of
summary judgment and remand this case to the district court to reconsider its
decision in light of Rodriguez.1
VACATED AND REMANDED.
1
We express no opinion as to whether summary judgment is appropriate in this case. On
remand, the district court should reexamine whether any genuine issue of material fact exists
under the Rodriguez analysis.
6