The Denver-based federal appeals court on Tuesday reinstated a former Papa John’s delivery driver’s lawsuit alleging violations of federal and state wage law.

Steve Mighell worked for one month at a Denver Papa John’s location in summer 2023. He alleged that, accounting for his unreimbursed vehicle expenses, his employer paid him less than the federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour or the required overtime wage. Mighell filed suit on behalf of all current and former Papa John’s delivery drivers in Colorado at locations operated by HPG Pizza.

In December 2024, U.S. District Court Judge S. Kato Crews dismissed the case. He concluded Mighell lacked standing to sue, meaning the allegations did not establish a “concrete injury.”

Based upon Mighell’s pay stubs, which HPG Pizza submitted, Crews calculated that Mighell “always received tips that brought him above the Colorado tipped minimum wage of $13.65 per hour.” Based upon Mighell’s estimates of his uncompensated costs of employment, Crews determined Mighell’s hourly wage was $9.07 per hour, “well above the $7.25 federal minimum,” Crews wrote.

On appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit, the parties disputed the math and Crews’ reliance on tips, somewhat confusing the three-judge panel hearing the case.

“It does seem to me that your position both relies and disclaims — it’s a little bit confusing, frankly, to follow — on documents that are not in the complaint,” Judge Veronica S. Rossman said to HPG Pizza’s lawyer during oral arguments.

Ultimately, the panel disagreed with Crews about Mighell’s failure to establish an injury. Specifically, Mighell had alleged that his unreimbursed vehicle expenses for deliveries brought his hourly wage below the federal minimum, and the allowance for tips was not a proper factor to consider.

“More specifically, although Plaintiff theorized (rightly or wrongly) that Defendants underpaid his regular and overtime wages, the district court assumed that Defendants could take the Colorado tip credit into account and use $13.65 as the starting point in determining whether it properly paid Plaintiff. Based on this determination, the district court concluded that Plaintiff had not alleged an injury,” wrote Judge Joel M. Carson III in the Aug. 11 order. “Stated otherwise, if Plaintiff’s legal theory is correct, Defendants paid him less than federal law requires for both regular and overtime wages.”

The 10th Circuit panel reversed Crews’ decision, while acknowledging that the parties had also argued about whether Mighell stated a viable wage claim aside from his standing to sue. The panel advised Crews to evaluate that issue himself.

The case is Mighell v. HPH Pizza I, LLC et al.