1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO.: 1:20-CV-22603-GOODMAN [CONSENT CASE]

ERIC CHAVEZ, ET AL.,

Plaintiff, 

v. 

GRILL ENTERPRISES, LLC AND 

RUBEN SIERRA, 

Defendants.

_______________________/

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION

Defendants, Grill Enteprises, LLC and Ruben Sierra, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) and 

the invitation by the Court, request that the Court clarify a portion of its Order Specially Setting 

Jury Trial and Pretrial Schedule and Requiring Mediation (“Trial Order”) [ECF No. 130] based 

on the parties’ inability to agree on the following:

1. The Court invited the parties to request clarification of any portion of the Trial 

Order that seemed confusing during the pre-trial conference held on April 25, 2023.

2. Plaintiffs and Defendants cannot agree on the application of the Trial Order’s 

requirements for (a) the verdict form and (b) the jury instructions and request clarification.

Jury Instructions

3. The Defendants emailed their proposed verdict form as a separate document from 

the jury instructions to the Plaintiffs on April 17, 2023.

4. After sending several emails requesting an update on the verdict form, the Plaintiffs

responded on April 27, 2023, that they interpreted the Trial Order to require the verdict form to 

be included as part of (and at the end of) the proposed jury instructions.

Case 1:20-cv-22603-JG Document 148 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 1 of 3
2

5. The parties request clarification about whether the Court requires the verdict form 

to be submitted as a separate document or to be included at the end of the proposed jury 

instructions.

Jury Instructions

6. Defendants submitted revised, proposed jury instructions by email to Plaintiffs on 

April 27, 2023. 

7. Defendants interpreted the Trial Order consistent with the requirements imposed 

by other Courts within this District.

8. Defendants believe they complied with the Trial Order by proposing jury 

instructions that italicize the portions of each of the jury instructions to which they objected and 

including their proposed revisions within the body of the instructions proposed by Plaintiffs (in 

boldface).

9. Plaintiffs complained about the way Defendants revised the proposed jury 

instructions, emphatically contending “that is not what the order requires.”

10. Plaintiffs now refuse to work from the proposed, revised jury instructions that 

Defendants provided.

11. Plaintiffs interpret the Trial Order to require that Defendants italicize the entirety 

of every jury instruction containing objectionable language and separately propose (and duplicate) 

a new version of each proposed jury instruction.

12. For example, and without requesting a ruling thereon at this time, if Defendants 

believe that the recordkeeping portion of the Eleventh Circuit’s Standard Jury Instruction for 

FLSA cases (4.14) is objectionable, they would italicize only the recordkeeping portion of the instruction 

but agree to the rest of it. Plaintiffs contend that Defendants should instead italicize (and object to) the 

whole Standard Jury Instruction for FLSA cases (4.14) proposed by Plaintiffs that includes the 

Case 1:20-cv-22603-JG Document 148 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 2 of 3
3

recordkeeping language and then propose an entirely separate version of the same instruction in 

boldface that omits the language to which Defendants object.

13. The way Plaintiffs read the Trial Order would seem to unnecessarily duplicate (and 

lengthen) the proposed jury instructions, which are already nearly 100 pages.

14. The parties request clarification.

WHEREFORE Defendants, Grill Enterprises, LLC and Ruben Sierra, request that the 

Court clarify the requirements of its Trial Order as they relate to preparing the proposed Jury 

Instruction and Verdict Form based on the foregoing.

CONFERRAL STATEMENT

Pursuant to Local Rule 7.1, Defendants hereby certify they conferred with Plaintiffs 

regarding the requirements of the Trial Order, but that the parties were unable to agree on its 

requirements necessitating this Motion for Clarification.

Dated this 28th day of April 2023.

s/ Todd W. Shulby, Esq.

Todd W. Shulby, Esq. (068365)

tshulby@shulbylaw.com

llangford@shulbylaw.com

TODD W. SHULBY, P.A.

1792 Bell Tower Lane

Weston, Florida 33326

Tel.: 954-530-2236

Counsel for Defendants

and

s/Brian H. Pollock, Esq.

Brian H. Pollock, Esq. (174742)

brian@fairlawattorney.com

FAIRLAW FIRM

135 San Lorenzo Avenue

Suite 770

Coral Gables, FL 33146

Tel: (305) 230-4884

Co-Counsel for Defendants

Case 1:20-cv-22603-JG Document 148 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/28/2023 Page 3 of 3