Case: 17-12866 Date Filed: 08/02/2018 Page: 1 of 37 [PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 17-12866 ________________________ D.C. Docket No. 2:10-cv-00542-MEA-MRM GAUDENCIO GARCIA-CELESTINO, individually and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated, RAYMUNDO CRUZ-VICENCIO, individually and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated, RAUL ISMAEL ESTRADA-GABRIEL, individually and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated, DANIEL FERRO-NIEVES, individually and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated, JOSE MANUEL FERRO-NIEVES, individually and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated, et al., Plaintiffs - Appellees, versus RUIZ HARVESTING, INC., Defendant, CONSOLIDATED CITRUS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, Defendant - Appellant. Case: 17-12866 Date Filed: 08/02/2018 Page: 2 of 37 ________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida ________________________ (August 2, 2018) Before TJOFLAT and ROSENBAUM, Circuit Judges, and UNGARO, * District Judge. ROSENBAUM, Circuit Judge: The English language contains many examples of homonyms—“words that have the same sound and often the same spelling but differ in meaning . . . .” The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language 843 (5th ed. 2011). The words “letter” (a symbol in the alphabet or a note) and “bark” (a dog’s cry or the outside covering of a tree trunk), for example, both fit the bill (as does “bill,” for that matter). But the language of the law has its share of homonyms, too, and in this case we confront a couple of subtle ones. Specifically, this case turns on the difference in meaning between the term “employer” under the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. § 203(d) (“FLSA”), and that same term under the general common law. Both definitions require us to ask how much “control” Defendant-Appellant Citrus Consolidated Limited Partnership (“Consolidated Citrus” or “the company”) * Honorable Ursula Ungaro, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Florida, sitting by designation. 2 Case: 17-12866 Date Filed: 08/02/2018 Page: 3 of 37 exerted over a group of farm workers who performed labor on Consolidated Citrus’s groves. But the answer to that question depends, in turn, on the meaning of “control,” which is also a legal homonym. Like “employer,” it also has different meanings under the FLSA and the common law. Plaintiffs-Appellees are migrant workers in the United States under the federal government’s H-2A visa program. Ruiz Harvesting, Inc. (“Ruiz Harvesting”)—a farm-labor contractor and a separate entity from Defendant- Appellant Consolidated Citrus—hired Plaintiffs to pick fruit at Consolidated Citrus’s groves. Then, apparently without Consolidated Citrus’s knowledge, Ruiz Harvesting forced Plaintiffs to kick back a portion of their paychecks under threat of deportation. Based on these circumstances, Plaintiffs sued Ruiz Harvesting, Basiliso Ruiz (the owner of Ruiz Harvesting), and Consolidated Citrus for violations of the FLSA and for breach of contract. Both Ruiz Harvesting and Ruiz settled with Plaintiffs and ceased to be parties to this lawsuit. As for Consolidated Citrus, the district court held a bench trial and found it liable for both causes of action. Then this ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals