A legal dispute has emerged over alleged unpaid overtime wages at a local law firm, raising questions about compliance with federal labor standards for salaried employees in similar roles. The complaint was filed by Jason Hardman on March 25, 2026, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia against Taylor, Lee & Associates, LLC and its managing member Jerome Lee.
According to the filing, Hardman worked as a paralegal at Taylor, Lee & Associates from April 15, 2025 through November 21, 2025. He alleges that during this period he regularly worked more than 40 hours per week but was not compensated at the time-and-a-half rate required by the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The complaint states that “Defendants failed…to pay Plaintiff overtime at the required time and one-half rate required by the FLSA.”
The lawsuit outlines that Hardman was paid an annual salary of $65,000 and had a regular hourly rate of $31.25 based on a standard 40-hour workweek. Despite this arrangement, Hardman claims he “conservatively worked an average of at least 55 hours per week” throughout his employment period. His duties included preparing forms and filings, organizing documents, communicating with clients, following attorney instructions, and responding to emails outside normal office hours.
Hardman further alleges that he typically arrived at work around 8:00am and left around 6:00pm on weekdays while often working through lunch. He also asserts that he was required to stay after hours to complete filings or meet deadlines and occasionally worked weekends. The complaint states that “Defendants were aware that Plaintiff was working these overtime hours” but did not maintain accurate records of his working time nor compensate him for overtime as mandated by law.
The document emphasizes that none of the exemptions under FLSA—such as executive, administrative, professional capacity or outside sales—applied to Hardman’s position. It is stated repeatedly in the filing that “Plaintiff was not exempt from the overtime pay requirements of the FLSA by reason of any exemption set forth in 29 U.S.C. § 213.” Furthermore, it is alleged that Jerome Lee exercised operational control over Hardman’s work activities including scheduling and compensation decisions.
Hardman contends that both Taylor, Lee & Associates and Jerome Lee are liable jointly and severally for failing to pay him proper overtime wages under Section 7 of the FLSA (29 U.S.C. §207). The complaint argues that “Defendants knew or should have known that the FLSA applied to Plaintiff” and characterizes their actions as willful violations.
As relief from the court, Hardman seeks an order finding both defendants liable for unpaid overtime pay due to him along with liquidated damages equal to those amounts pursuant to Section 216 of the FLSA (29 U.S.C. §216). He also requests pre-judgment and post-judgment interest at applicable rates as well as any other relief deemed appropriate by the court.
The case identifies Jason Hardman as representing himself pro se in this matter; no additional attorneys are listed in the document. The case is docketed under Case No.: 1:26-cv-01648-LMM.
Source: 126cv01648_Jason_Hardman_v_Taylor_Lee_Complaint_Northern_District_of_Georgia.pdf
