Cracker Barrel Old Country Store, Inc. v. Harrington et al.
U.S. Supreme Court (cert. stage)
- Home
- Retail Litigation Center
- Cracker Barrel Old Country Store, Inc. v....
Date: December 8, 2025
Question Presented: Whether a district court may authorize notice inviting joinder to an FLSA collective action before a plaintiff shows by a preponderance of the evidence that the members of the collective receiving notice are “similarly situated” to the named plaintiff within the meaning of 29 U.S.C. § 216(b)? If not, what showing must be made before this notice may be authorized?
RLC’s Position: The RLC’s brief explains how there is an unambiguous split in the circuits on the proper standard district courts must apply in an FLSA suit before authorizing notice being sent to potentially “similarly situated” employees inviting joinder which has undermined uniformity in the law and led to forum shopping. Furthermore, the brief explains how the lenient approach adopted by many courts before authorizing notice to be sent has caused serious monetary and reputational harm to employers.
Counsel: Theane Evangelis, Bradley J. Hamburger, and Samuel Eckman of RLC law firm member Gibson Dunn.
Additional Documents:
Initial Brief- 9th Circuit (July 25, 2025)
Question Presented: Whether a district court may authorize notice inviting joinder to an FLSA collective action before a plaintiff shows by a preponderance of the evidence that the members of the collective receiving notice are “similarly situated” to the named plaintiff within the meaning of 29 U.S.C. § 216(b)? If not, what showing must be made before this notice may be authorized?
RLC’s Position: The RLC’s brief explains how there is an unambiguous split in the circuits on the proper standard district courts must apply in an FLSA suit before authorizing notice being sent to potentially “similarly situated” employees inviting joinder which has undermined uniformity in the law and led to forum shopping. Furthermore, the brief explains how the lenient approach adopted by many courts before authorizing notice to be sent has caused serious monetary and reputational harm to employers.
Counsel: Theane Evangelis, Bradley J. Hamburger, and Samuel Eckman of RLC law firm member Gibson Dunn.
Additional Documents:
Initial Brief- 9th Circuit (July 25, 2025)