CHICAGO (LN) — A federal judge in Chicago denied Helia Healthcare Services' motion to dismiss a putative class action, ruling the skilled nursing facility operator failed to contest the sufficiency of allegations that it automatically docked workers thirty minutes of pay per day for breaks they never took.
Amanda High, who worked as an hourly employee at Helia from October 2022 until March 2025, claims the company systematically shaved thirty minutes from workers' recorded hours each day regardless of whether they actually received a break. She also alleges Helia miscalculated overtime by excluding bonuses from employees' regular rates of pay — a separate theory that survived alongside the break-deduction claims.
Helia operates skilled nursing facilities in Illinois and Missouri, and High brought claims on behalf of herself and similarly situated workers under the Fair Labor Standards Act, the Illinois Minimum Wage Law, and the Illinois Wage Payment and Collection Act.
Helia's two-page motion to dismiss asserted that it never employed High, never deducted thirty minutes from paychecks, and that High had failed to name a necessary party. To back those assertions, the company attached one of High's purported pay stubs, an email from Helia's counsel to High's counsel, and a memo on the company's timekeeping policy for lunch breaks.
U.S. District Judge Jeremy C. Daniel refused to look at any of it. Because none of the attached documents were referenced in High's complaint, the court declined to consider them — and when Helia implicitly asked the court to convert the motion into one for summary judgment, Daniel exercised his discretion and said no.
Daniel wrote that the veracity of the plaintiff's allegations is not at issue at the pleading stage, citing the Seventh Circuit's decision in Swanson v. Citibank, N.A. He added that Helia has not contested the sufficiency of High's allegations — a notable gap given that contesting sufficiency is the entire point of a Rule 12(b)(6) motion.
The missing-party argument fared no better. Daniel noted that dismissal under Rule 12(b)(7) requires a defendant to establish that the requirements of Rule 19 have been satisfied, and that Helia made no effort to argue as much. Quoting the Seventh Circuit, he wrote that dismissal on that ground is not the preferred outcome under the Rules.
Helia must answer the complaint by April 3, 2026, and the case moves to a scheduling conference set for April 23, 2026. The parties are directed to complete their Rule 26(f) conference on or before April 2, 2026, and to file their Rule 26(f)(2) report and initial disclosures on or before April 16, 2026.
High's complaint covers a workforce spread across Helia's Illinois and Missouri nursing facilities, and the size of the putative class — and the aggregate unpaid wages at stake — has not yet been established.