`
`Filed in District Court
`State of Minnesota
`10/27/2021 4:43 PM
`
`STATE OF MINNESOTA
`
`COUNTY OF RAMSEY
`
`
`
`
`Trevon Estes, on behalf of himself
`and all others similarly situated,
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`DISTRICT COURT
`
`SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT
`
`Case Type: Employment / Class Action
`
` Court File No. __________________
`Judge:__________________________
`
`SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION
`
`vs.
`
`Peloton Interactive, Inc.;
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`TO: Peloton Interactive, Inc.
`2345 Rice Street #230
`Roseville, Minnesota 55113
`
`
`
`1. YOU ARE BEING SUED. The Plaintiff has started a lawsuit against
`you. The Plaintiff's Complaint against you is attached to this summons. Do not
`throw these papers away. They are official papers that affect your rights. You
`must respond to this lawsuit even though it may not yet be filed with the Court
`and there may be no court file number on this summons.
`2. YOU MUST REPLY WITHIN 21 DAYS TO PROTECT YOUR
`RIGHTS. You must give or mail to the person who signed this summons a
`written response called an Answer within 21 days of the date on which you
`received this Summons. You must send a copy of your Answer to the person
`who signed this summons to the address below.
`3. YOU MUST RESPOND TO EACH CLAIM. The Answer is your written
`response to the Plaintiff's Complaint. In your Answer you must state whether
`you agree or disagree with each paragraph of the Complaint. If you believe the
`Plaintiff should not be given everything asked for in the Complaint, you must
`say so in your Answer.
`
`4. YOU WILL LOSE YOUR CASE IF YOU DO NOT SEND A WRITTEN
`RESPONSE TO THE COMPLAINT TO THE PERSON WHO SIGNED THIS
`SUMMONS. If you do not Answer within 21 days, you will lose this case. You
`
`
`
`62-CV-21-5746
`
`Filed in District Court
`State of Minnesota
`10/27/2021 4:43 PM
`
`will not get to tell your side of the story, and the Court may decide against you
`and award the Plaintiff everything asked for in the complaint. If you do not
`want to contest the claims stated in the complaint, you do not need to respond.
`A default judgment can then be entered against you for the relief requested in
`the complaint.
`5. LEGAL ASSISTANCE. You may wish to get legal help from a lawyer. If
`you do not have a lawyer, the Court Administrator may have information about
`places where you can get legal assistance. Even if you cannot get legal help,
`you must still provide a written Answer to protect your rights or you may
`lose the case.
`6. ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION. The parties may agree to or
`be ordered to participate in an alternative dispute resolution process under
`Rule 114 of the Minnesota General Rules of Practice. You must still send your
`written response to the Complaint even if you expect to use alternative means
`of resolving this dispute.
`
`Dated: September 17, 2021
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Joshua R. Williams (#389118)
`jwilliams@jrwilliamslaw.com
`2836 Lyndale Avenue S, Suite 160
`Minneapolis, Minnesota 55408
`(612) 486-5540
`(612) 605-1944 Fax
`
`ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`62-CV-21-5746
`
`Filed in District Court
`State of Minnesota
`10/27/2021 4:43 PM
`
`STATE OF MINNESOTA
`
`COUNTY OF RAMSEY
`
`
`
`
`DISTRICT COURT
`
`SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT
`
`Case Type: Employment / Class Action
`
`Trevon Estes, on behalf of himself
`and all others similarly situated,
`
` Court File No. __________________
`
`Judge:__________________________
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`vs.
`
`COLLECTIVE AND CLASS ACTION
`COMPLAINT
`
`Peloton Interactive, Inc.;
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`STATEMENT OF CLAIM
`
`Plaintiff Trevon Estes brings this class action complaint on behalf of
`
`himself individually and all others similarly situated to recover earned wages
`
`that Defendant Peloton Interactive Inc. failed to pay its employees.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`1.
`
`This action arises under Minnesota statutory law, and the Fair
`
`Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 201 et seq. (the “FLSA”). Therefore, the
`
`Court has jurisdiction to hear this Complaint. The Court also has jurisdiction
`
`pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 484.01, et seq. This matter is properly venued in
`
`Ramsey County, Minnesota under Minn. Stat. § 542.01, et seq., because
`
`Defendant’s registered office is in Ramsey County.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`62-CV-21-5746
`
`PARTIES
`
`Filed in District Court
`State of Minnesota
`10/27/2021 4:43 PM
`
`2.
`
`Plaintiff is an adult resident of Minnesota. Defendant employed
`
`between approximately September 2019 through March 2021.
`
`3.
`
`Defendant Pelton Interactive, Inc. is a Delaware corporation in the
`
`business of providing nationwide indoor cycling training and selling indoor
`
`cycling bicycles. According to the Minneapolis Secretary of State online
`
`database, Defendant’s registered office in the state of Minnesota is 2345 Rice
`
`Street #230, Roseville, Minnesota 55113.
`
`4.
`
`Defendant has multiple locations throughout the country,
`
`including two locations in Minnesota. Defendant has a retail showroom in
`
`Bloomington, Minnesota and a warehouse in Minneapolis, Minnesota.
`
`Defendant provides various fitness products and services to customers in
`
`multiple states across the country, including Minnesota.
`
`5.
`
`At all relevant times, Defendant has been an employer engaged in
`
`interstate commerce and/or the production of goods or services for commerce
`
`within the meaning of the FLSA.
`
`6.
`
`At all relevant times, Defendant has had an annual gross volume
`
`of sales made or business done of more than $500,000.
`
`FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
`
`7.
`
`Defendant employed Plaintiff and similarly situated individuals
`
`within the relevant liability period.
`
`8.
`
`Defendant employed Plaintiff as a Field Specialist.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`62-CV-21-5746
`
`Filed in District Court
`State of Minnesota
`10/27/2021 4:43 PM
`
`9.
`
`Plaintiff’s job duties included delivering and setting up indoor
`
`cycling bicycles.
`
`10.
`
`In all workweeks relevant to this action, Plaintiff performed job
`
`duties affecting safety on motor vehicles weighing 10,000 pounds or less.
`
`11. Such motor vehicles were not designed or used to transport more
`
`than eight passengers for compensation or otherwise; or used in transporting
`
`hazardous material.
`
`12. At all times relevant to this action, Defendant did not pay Plaintiff
`
`on a salary basis.
`
`13. At all times relevant to this action, Defendant paid Plaintiff on an
`
`hourly basis.
`
`14. Plaintiff frequently worked more than 40 hours per week.
`
`15. Plaintiff sometimes worked more than 48 hours per week.
`
`16. As Plaintiff’s paystubs reflect, Defendant failed to pay Plaintiff the
`
`overtime premium for any hours he worked over 40 hours but less than 48
`
`hours in a workweek:
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`62-CV-21-5746
`
`Filed in District Court
`State of Minnesota
`10/27/2021 4:43 PM
`
`17. Plaintiff frequently performed work for Defendant during scheduled
`
`break periods.
`
`18. Defendant did not pay Plaintiff for the work he performed during
`
`scheduled break periods.
`
`19. Defendant’s failure to pay Plaintiff for the work he performed
`
`during scheduled break periods resulted in it paying him less overtime
`
`compensation than what he earned.
`
`20. Plaintiff earned non-discretionary bonuses from Defendant.
`
`21. Defendant did not factor Plaintiff’s non-discretionary bonuses into
`
`his regular rate of pay when calculating the overtime compensation rate that it
`
`paid him.
`
`22. Defendant’s failure to factor Plaintiff’s non-discretionary bonuses
`
`into his regular rate of pay when calculating the overtime compensation that it
`
`paid him resulted in it paying him less overtime compensation that what he
`
`earned.
`
`CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS
`
`23. Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of himself and on behalf of all
`
`individuals similarly situated. The proposed class is defined as follows: all
`
`citizens of Minnesota whom Defendant employed and paid on an hourly basis
`
`during the relevant liability period.
`
`24. Defendant has willfully engaged in a pattern, policy, and practice
`
`of unlawful conduct for the actions alleged in this Complaint, in violation of the
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`62-CV-21-5746
`
`Filed in District Court
`State of Minnesota
`10/27/2021 4:43 PM
`
`federal and state rights of Plaintiff, those similarly situated, and members of
`
`the putative class.
`
`25. Plaintiff and the class members were all subject to the same
`
`employment policies, procedures, and practices.
`
`26. Defendant knew, or should have known, that Plaintiff and the
`
`class performed work that required overtime pay. Defendant operated under a
`
`scheme to deprive these workers of overtime compensation by failing to
`
`properly compensate these employees for their overtime hours worked, failing
`
`to pay these employees for all of their hours worked, and failing to factor the
`
`non-discretionary bonus into their regular rate of pay.
`
`27. This action is maintainable as a class action under Minnesota Rule
`
`of Civil Procedure 23.01 because the class is so numerous that joinder of all
`
`members is impracticable, there are questions of law or fact common to the
`
`class, the claims or defenses of the representative parties are typical of the
`
`claims or defenses of the class, and the representative parties will fairly and
`
`adequately protect the interest of the class.
`
`28. This action is also properly maintainable as a class action under
`
`Minnesota Rule of Civil Procedure 23.02 because questions of law or facts
`
`common to members of the class predominate over any questions affecting only
`
`individual members, and because the class action is superior to other available
`
`methods for the fair and efficient adjudication of the controversy.
`
`29. The members of the class identified above are so numerous that
`
`joinder of all members is impracticable. The exact number of the class is
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`62-CV-21-5746
`
`Filed in District Court
`State of Minnesota
`10/27/2021 4:43 PM
`
`unknown, but it will be comprised of more than 40 class members. The exact
`
`number may be determined from records maintained by Defendant.
`
`30. There are numerous and substantial questions of law and fact
`
`common to all of the members of the Class, including but not limited to the
`
`following:
`
`a. Whether Defendant violated state and federal law by failing to
`
`properly pay Plaintiff and class members overtime compensation
`
`and all straight time worked;
`
`b. Whether Defendant’s conduct is in willful violation of the law.
`
`31. Defendant is expected to raise common defenses to this class
`
`action, including denial that its actions violated the law.
`
`32. Plaintiff will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the Class
`
`and he has retained counsel experienced and competent in the prosecution of
`
`complex class action litigation.
`
`33. The claims of Plaintiff are typical of the claims of the Class.
`
`Plaintiff has the same interest and suffers from the same injuries as the class
`
`members. Namely, that Defendant failed to properly compensate Plaintiff and
`
`class members.
`
`34. Upon information and belief, no other member of the class has an
`
`interest in individually controlling the prosecution of his/her claims, especially
`
`in light of the relatively small value of each claim and the difficulties involved in
`
`bringing individual litigation against one’s employer. However, if any such
`
`class member should become known, he or she may “opt out” of this action
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`62-CV-21-5746
`
`Filed in District Court
`State of Minnesota
`10/27/2021 4:43 PM
`
`upon receipt of the class action notice pursuant to the Minnesota Rule of Civil
`
`Procedure, Rule 23.03.
`
`35. Plaintiff is unaware of any other litigation concerning this
`
`controversy commenced by or for other class members.
`
`36. Litigation should be concentrated in this forum because most of
`
`the class members are or were employed by Defendant within this forum.
`
`COUNT I
`VIOLATION OF THE FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT
`
`37. Plaintiff restates the preceding paragraphs as if fully stated herein.
`
`38. Plaintiff has given his consent to become a party to this lawsuit
`
`against Defendant as required by 29 U.S.C. § 216(b). (See Exhibit A, attached.)
`
`39. At all times relevant to this action, Plaintiff has been entitled to the
`
`rights, protections, and benefits provided under the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. §§ 201, et
`
`seq.
`
`40. The FLSA regulates, among other things, the payment of overtime
`
`pay by certain classes of employers.
`
`41. Defendant is subject to the overtime pay requirements of the FLSA.
`
`42. Defendant willfully violated the FLSA by refusing to pay proper
`
`overtime compensation to Plaintiff and his similarly situated coworkers.
`
`43. Section 13 of the FLSA, codified at 29 U.S.C. § 213, exempts
`
`certain categories of employees from overtime pay obligations.
`
`44. None of the FLSA exemptions apply to Plaintiff and his similarly
`
`situated coworkers.
`
`
`
`7
`
`
`
`62-CV-21-5746
`
`Filed in District Court
`State of Minnesota
`10/27/2021 4:43 PM
`
`45. Plaintiff and his similarly situated coworkers are entitled to
`
`damages equal to the mandated overtime premium pay within the three years
`
`preceding service of this Complaint, plus periods of equitable tolling, because
`
`Defendant acted willfully and knew, or showed reckless disregard of the fact,
`
`that its conduct was prohibited by the FLSA.
`
`46. Defendant has acted neither in good faith nor with reasonable
`
`grounds to believe that its actions and omissions were not a violation of the
`
`FLSA, and as a result Plaintiff and his similarly situated coworkers are entitled
`
`to recover an award of liquidated damages in an amount equal to the amount
`
`of unpaid overtime pay described under Section 16(b) of the FLSA, codified at
`
`29 U.S.C. § 216(b).
`
`47. Alternatively, should the Court find that Defendant did not act
`
`willfully in failing to pay overtime pay, Plaintiff and his similarly situated
`
`coworkers are entitled to an award of prejudgment interest at the applicable
`
`legal rate.
`
`48. As a result of these willful violations of the FLSA’s overtime pay
`
`provisions, Defendant unlawfully withheld overtime compensation from
`
`Plaintiff and his similarly situated coworkers.
`
`COUNT II
`VIOLATION OF THE MINNESOTA FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT
`OVERTIME PAY REQUIREMENT
`
`49. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates all of the above paragraphs as
`
`though fully stated herein.
`
`
`
`8
`
`
`
`62-CV-21-5746
`
`Filed in District Court
`State of Minnesota
`10/27/2021 4:43 PM
`
`50. The Minnesota FLSA, Minn. Stat. § 177.25, requires employers to
`
`pay overtime for all hours worked in excess of 48 per week. Section 177.27
`
`makes employers who violate section 177.25 liable to the affected employees in
`
`the amount of unpaid overtime, costs, attorney fees, and other appropriate
`
`relief under the law.
`
`51. Defendant is the ‘employer’ and Plaintiff and his similarly situated
`
`coworkers are the ‘employees’ for purposes of the Minnesota FLSA.
`
`52. Defendant violated the Minnesota FLSA by regularly and
`
`repeatedly failing to pay proper overtime compensation to Plaintiff and his
`
`similarly situated coworkers.
`
`53. Defendant knew, or showed reckless disregard for, the fact that it
`
`violated the Minnesota FLSA by failing to properly pay Plaintiff and his
`
`similarly situated coworkers for the work activities described in this Complaint.
`
`54. These violations occurred within the statutory period prescribed by
`
`Minn. Stat. § 541.07.
`
`55. Plaintiff and his similarly situated coworkers suffered damages as
`
`a result of Defendant’s violation of the Minnesota FLSA.
`
`COUNT III
`VIOLATION OF THE MINNESOTA PAYMENT OF WAGES ACT
`Minn. Stat. §§ 181.101, 181.13, 181.14, and Minn. Rule 5200.0120,
`Subpart 1
`
`56. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporate the above paragraphs as though
`
`fully stated herein.
`
`57. Defendant agreed to pay Plaintiff and class members an hourly
`
`wage for all hours worked for Defendant.
`
`
`
`9
`
`
`
`62-CV-21-5746
`
`Filed in District Court
`State of Minnesota
`10/27/2021 4:43 PM
`
`58. The Minnesota Payment of Wages Act requires employers to pay for
`
`all straight time worked.
`
`59. Defendant violated the Minnesota Payment of Wages Act and Minn.
`
`Rule 5200.0120 by failing to compensate Plaintiff and class members for all
`
`straight time worked.
`
`60. Defendant knew, or showed reckless disregard for, the fact that it
`
`violated the Minnesota Payment of Wages Act and Minn. Rule 5200.0120 by
`
`failing to pay Plaintiff and class members for all straight time worked.
`
`JURY DEMAND
`
`61. Plaintiff and class members demand a jury trial.
`
`REQUEST FOR RELIEF
`
`
`
`WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, individually and on behalf of the class, requests
`
`relief as follows:
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`Certification of this case as a class and collective action;
`
`Designation of Plaintiff as representative of the class and Plaintiff’s
`
`counsel as Class Counsel;
`
`3.
`
`A finding that, during the relevant liability period, Defendant is
`
`liable to Plaintiff and class members for failing to properly
`
`compensate Plaintiff and class members;
`
`4.
`
`Judgment against Defendant for an amount exceeding $50,000,
`
`equal to Plaintiff’s and class members’ unpaid overtime wages and
`
`an equal amount of liquidated damages, at the applicable wage
`
`
`
`10
`
`
`
`62-CV-21-5746
`
`Filed in District Court
`State of Minnesota
`10/27/2021 4:43 PM
`
`rate (or prejudgment interest, if liquidated damages are not
`
`awarded);
`
`5.
`
`Pre- and post-judgment interest on all damages and other relief
`
`6.
`
`7.
`
`8.
`
`awarded herein;
`
`Leave to add additional Plaintiffs;
`
`Costs and attorneys’ fees to the extent allowed by law;
`
`Grant Plaintiff and class members all other statutory relief to
`
`which they are entitled;
`
`9.
`
`Grant Plaintiff leave to amend the Complaint if the Court finds this
`
`pleading deficient in any way; and
`
`10. Such further relief as the Court deems equitable and just.
`
`
`
`Dated: September 16, 2021
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Dated: September 16, 2021
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Joshua R. Williams (#389118)
`jwilliams@jrwilliamslaw.com
`2836 Lyndale Avenue S, Suite 160
`Minneapolis, Minnesota 55408
`(612) 486-5540
`(612) 605-1944 Fax
`
`
`
` /s/Adam R. Strauss
`Adam R. Strauss (#0390942)
`Tarshish Cody, PLC
`ars@attorneysinmn.com
`6337 Penn Avenue South
`Minneapolis, Minnesota 55423
`(952) 361-5556
`(952) 361-5559 Fax
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`11
`
`
`
`62-CV-21-5746
`
`Filed in District Court
`State of Minnesota
`10/27/2021 4:43 PM
`
`ACKNOWLEDGEMENT REQUIRED BY MINN. STAT. § 549.211
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff, through undersigned counsel, acknowledges that sanctions,
`
`attorneys’ fees, and witness fees may be imposed under Minn. Stat. § 549.211.
`
`
`
`
`Dated: September 16, 2021
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Joshua R. Williams (#389118)
`jwilliams@jrwilliamslaw.com
`2836 Lyndale Avenue S, Suite 160
`Minneapolis, Minnesota 55408
`(612) 486-5540
`(612) 605-1944 Fax
`
`ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`12
`
`
`
`62-CV-21-5746
`
`Filed in District Court
`State of Minnesota
`10/27/2021 4:43 PM
`
`VERIFICATION OF COMPLAINT AND CERTIFICATION
`
`Pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 358.116, Plaintiff Trevon Estes verifies, certifies,
`and declares under penalty of perjury, as follows:
`
`1.
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`I am a Plaintiff in this civil proceeding.
`I have read the above-entitled Complaint prepared by my attorneys
`and I believe that all of the facts contained in it are true, to the best of
`my knowledge, information and belief formed after reasonable inquiry.
`I believe that this Complaint is well grounded in fact and warranted
`by existing law or by a good faith argument for the extension,
`modification, or reversal of existing law.
`I believe that this Complaint is not interposed for any improper
`purpose, such as to harass any Defendants, cause unnecessary delay
`to any Defendant, or create a needless increase in the cost of litigation
`to any Defendant, named in the Complaint.
`I have filed this Complaint in good faith and solely for the purposes
`set forth in it.
`I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States
`of America and under the laws of the State of Minnesota that the
`foregoing is true and correct.
`
`09 / 16 / 2021
`EXECUTED ON:______________________________
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`_________________________________
`Trevon Estes
`
`13
`
`