Last Monday we wrote about an opinion by Magistrate Judge Goodman finding successor liability under FLSA in light of there being no clear 11th Circuit authority addressing the issue.
Despite a few folks cracking wise in the comments, it was perfectly clear that the Judge was not usurping the 11th Circuit, rather he was attempting to divine how the 11th might rule in the absence of binding 11th Circuit precedent.
As is his wont, however, Judge Goodman has decided to put a very fine point on the matter, clarifying in an amended order that -- heavens no -- he is not acting like the 11th Circuit -- he is just ruling as he thinks the 11th would rule if they were to ever address the issue:
The amendment makes clear that the Court’s ruling is based on a determination of how the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals would rule, given that there is no on point Eleventh Circuit opinion.Ok, I mean I thought that was pretty obvious -- who thought otherwise?
Did this really need to be stated, or restated?
The parties have consented to full jurisdiction by the Undersigned magistrate judge, which means that the Undersigned is functioning as a district court and that any appeal of this Order is to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, not to the district court. Because the Eleventh Circuit has not decided the issue, the Undersigned’s task is to predict how the Eleventh Circuit would rule if presented with the identical issue of successor liability.I guess it never hurts to clarify.