Contract analysis

I. INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE OF THIS STATEMENT This document is a preliminary draft mediation position statement prepared by Calderwood & Harkness LLP on behalf of Defendant Stonefield Logistics Group Inc. ("SLG" or "Stonefield") in anticipation of a potential early mediation of the above-captioned matter. This draft has been prepared at the specific request of Ridgepoint Capital Partners Fund III, LP ("Ridgepoint"),

II. SUMMARY OF THE DISPUTE A. Nature of the Action Named Plaintiff Marcus Delano, a former delivery driver who performed last-mile residential delivery services for Stonefield, filed this collective action on April 30, 2025, under the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), 29 U.S.C. § 216(b), and the Texas Payday Law, Tex. Lab. Code §§ 61.001 et seq. At its core, this case is a worker misclassification dispute. Delano al

III. STONEFIELD'S POSITION ON DRIVER CLASSIFICATION A. The FLSA Economic Reality Test — Overview The threshold issue in this case is whether Stonefield's delivery drivers are "employees" entitled to overtime protection under the FLSA, or independent contractors who fall outside the statute's coverage. Under the FLSA, the determination of whether a worker is an employee or an independent contractor is governed by the

IV. KEY DEFENSES A. Independent Contractor Status As detailed in Section III above, Stonefield has strong arguments under the FLSA economic reality test that its delivery drivers are bona fide independent contractors. This is Stonefield's principal defense on the merits and, if successful, would result in dismissal of all claims with prejudice. In assessing the strength of this defense, it is relevant that Stonefield

Section 14. Dispute Resolution — Binding Arbitration. Any dispute, claim, or controversy arising out of or relating to this Agreement or the breach, termination, enforcement, interpretation, or validity thereof, including the determination of the scope or applicability of this agreement to arbitrate, shall be determined by binding arbitration before a single arbitrator administered by JAMS pursuant to its Streamlined

V. DAMAGES DISPUTE A. Plaintiff's Damages Theory Plaintiff's damages theory, as set forth in the Complaint and developed through initial discovery, rests on the following factual allegations and calculations: Named Plaintiff Delano alleges that he regularly worked between 55 and 65 hours per week while engaged as a driver for SLG, but was compensated exclusively on a per-delivery basis without any overtime premium fo

VI. INSURANCE COVERAGE CONSIDERATIONS Stonefield maintains an Employment Practices Liability Insurance ("EPLI") policy with Broadleaf Insurance Company, located at 100 Constitution Plaza, Hartford, Connecticut 06103. The relevant policy details are as follows: Policy Number: BIC-EPL-2024-07831 Policy Period: January 1, 2025 – January 1, 2026 Self-Insured Retention ("SIR"): $2,000,000 Policy Limit: $10,000,000 (aggreg

VII. STONEFIELD'S ASSESSMENT OF MEDIATION TIMING The question of when to propose mediation — or whether to propose it at all at this stage — is a strategic decision that involves weighing litigation leverage, cost considerations, and the business imperatives of Stonefield and its private equity sponsor. This section analyzes the competing considerations. A. Arguments for Early Mediation Several factors counsel in fav