JORGE ANDUJAR and FRANKLIN PENA BATISTA, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, v. HUB GROUP TRUCKING, INC. - Articles

All Content

JORGE ANDUJAR and FRANKLIN PENA BATISTA, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, v. HUB GROUP TRUCKING, INC.

Posted by: Azya Thornton on Dec 16, 2025

Court: 6th Circuit Court (Published Opinions)

Attorneys 1: ARGUED: Harold Lichten, LICHTEN & LISS-RIORDAN, P.C., Boston, Massachusetts, for Appellants.

Attorneys 2: ARGUED: Edna D. Guerrasio, PROSKAUER ROSE LLP, New York, New York, for Appellee.

Attorneys 3: ON BRIEF: Harold Lichten, Matthew Thomson, LICHTEN & LISS-RIORDAN, P.C., Boston, Massachusetts, Peter Winebrake, Mart Gottesfeld, WINEBRAKE & SANTILLO, LLC, Dresher, Pennsylvania, for Appellants.

Attorneys 4: ON BRIEF: Edna D. Guerrasio, Allan S. Bloom, PROSKAUER ROSE LLP, New York, New York, for Appellee.

Judge(s): NALBANDIAN, MATHIS, and RITZ, Circuit Judges

Court Appealed: United States District Court for the Western District of Tennessee at Memphis.

MATHIS, Circuit Judge. Jorge Andujar and Franklin Pena Batista worked for years as delivery drivers for Hub Group Trucking, Inc. In 2023, they filed a putative class action against Hub Group, alleging that the company violated the New Jersey Wage Payment Law, N.J. Stat. Ann. § 34:11-4.1 et seq., and the New Jersey Wage and Hour Law, N.J. Stat. Ann. § 34:11-56a et seq. But Andujar and Batista had choice-of-law provisions in their contracts with Hub Group requiring Tennessee law to govern any disputes. So Hub Group sought to enforce these provisions and dismiss the New Jersey-law claims. The district court agreed with Hub Group and dismissed the action. Plaintiffs now challenge the district court’s dismissal. We hold that the choice-of-law provisions in the contracts are unenforceable because there is no material connection between Tennessee and the transactions at issue. We thus reverse the district court’s dismissal of the complaint

Attachments: