govinfo:USCOURTS-nynd-5_25-cv-01080-1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 
 
DILLON SIMS, individually and on behalf of 
all others similarly situated, 
 
Plaintiff, 
 
v. 
 
SYRACUSE HAULERS WASTE REMOVAL, 
INC., 
 
Defendant. 
 
 
 
 
 5:25-cv-1080 
 (ECC/MJK) 
 
Carter T. Hastings, Esq., for Plaintiff 
Katherine S. McClung, Esq., for Defendant 
Hon. Elizabeth C. Coombe, United States District Judge: 
ORDER 
As directed by the Court’s May 6, 2026 Memorandum-Decision and Order granting in part 
Plaintiff Dillon Sims’s motion for conditional certification of a collective under the Fair Labor 
Standards Act of 1938 (FLSA), Dkt. No. 58, the parties have submitted their proposed notices and 
consent forms to be sent to potential opt -in plaintiffs. Dkt. Nos. 61, 62. The Court resolves the 
parties’ areas of disagreement as set forth below and approves the notice and consent att ached to 
this Order for dissemination to members of the conditionally certified collective. 
The Court has made three changes to the Notice of Collective Action Lawsuit (Notice), the 
content of which the parties agreed upon. See Dkt. Nos. 61-1, 62-1. First, the Court has changed 
the title of section 6 of the Notice from “You Cannot Fire You for Joining This Lawsuit” to “You 
Cannot Be Fired for Joining This Lawsuit .” Second, the Court strikes the sentence “This 
percentage will be reduced by any award of attorneys’ fees received from the Court” from the 
second to last paragraph of section 6. See Skidmore v. John J. Casale, Inc., 160 F.2d 527, 531 (2d 

2 
Cir. 1947) (“We have considerable doubt as to the validity of the contingent fee arrangement; for 
it may well be that Congress intended that an employee’s recovery should be net, and that therefore 
the lawyer’s compensation should come solely from the employer.”). Third, the Court has changed 
the last sentence of section 7 to read: “You should not contact Syracuse Haulers or the Court to 
discuss this lawsuit.” See Dkt. No. 62- 2 at 5; Davella v. Ellis Hospital, Inc. , No. 20- cv-726 
(MAD/MJK) (N.D.N.Y.), Dkt. Nos. 147-1 at 5, 148. 
With respect to the Consent to Joint Wage Claim Against Syracuse Haulers (Consent), the 
parties dispute how to describe the scope of potential opt -in plaintiffs’ claims. Because the 
“statutory language [of the FLSA] indicates that once a potential plaintiff opts in, that person is a 
party to the action, not just to a claim,” Fengler v. Crouse Health Sys., Inc., 634 F. Supp. 2d 257, 
262-63 (N.D.N.Y. 2009), the Court rejects Defendant’s request to describe the claim as an FLSA 
“claim of allegedly unpaid overt ime worked during meal breaks” and will adopt Plaintiff’s 
proposed “claims of unpaid wages” language instead. 
Finally, Defendant objects to Plaintiff’s request to include a paragraph on the Consent 
authorizing Plaintiff’s attorneys to “re-file” the Consent “in a separate lawsuit or arbitration” if 
needed. Plaintiff argues that this provision is a “critical safeguard” to protect claims from expiring 
statutes of limitations if the collective is later decertified. Dkt. No. 62 at 2. Because it appears that 
such provisions are common in FLSA consent forms, and because Plaintiff’s proposed language 
restricts the authorization to re-file to situations where this collective action “is decertified, if the 
case is dismissed in favor o[f] arbitration, or if the Parties agree to proceed to arbitration,” Dkt. 
No. 62-1 at 5, the Court will approve Plaintiff’s proposed language. 
Accordingly, it is hereby 

3 
ORDERED that any objections to the Court’s changes to the Notice must be filed by June 
17, 2026; and it is further 
ORDERED that if no objections are received by June 17, 2026, the Notice and Consent 
attached to this Order are approved for dissemination to potential collective members without 
further Order of this Court. 
IT IS SO ORDERED. 
Dated: June 12, 2026 

Passage view · GavelSight