The Arrow Senior Living lawsuit landscape is dominated by federal wage-and-hour collective actions accusing the St. Charles, Missouri-based operator of shorting hourly caregivers on overtime, chiefly by automatically deducting 30-minute meal breaks that workers say they never actually got. The largest of those cases, filed in October 2025 and covering 35 Arrow-affiliated entities across several states, reached a proposed settlement in May 2026 and is awaiting court approval. Arrow has also been sued in recent years over employment discrimination, an unfair labor practice charge, and copyright infringement.
What the Overtime Lawsuits Allege
Two payroll practices sit at the center of the Fair Labor Standards Act claims against Arrow.
The first is an automatic 30-minute meal-break deduction taken from every healthcare employee’s daily hours, whether or not the employee actually received an uninterrupted, work-free break. In a 24/7 care setting where alarms and resident emergencies interrupt downtime, workers say they routinely worked through those breaks without being paid.1Coffman Legal, LLC. Unpaid Overtime Lawsuit Filed Against Arrow Senior Living Management
The second is how Arrow calculated the “regular rate of pay” that overtime is based on. Under the FLSA, nondiscretionary bonuses have to be folded into that rate. Plaintiffs say Arrow left out two kinds: bonuses paid for picking up extra or unscheduled shifts, and “sign-on” bonuses that functioned as retention pay because they were not paid in full until the employee stayed a specified length of time.1Coffman Legal, LLC. Unpaid Overtime Lawsuit Filed Against Arrow Senior Living Management
Olin-Marquez v. Arrow Senior Living
The first major case was filed in 2021 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio by Kendall Olin-Marquez, a former employee at Arrow’s Carriage Court Senior Living community in Hilliard, Ohio. She brought claims under the FLSA, the Ohio Minimum Fair Wage Standard Act, and the Ohio Prompt Pay Act.2vLex. Olin-Marquez v. Arrow Senior Living Mgmt., LLC
Arrow moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction or, in the alternative, to transfer the case to Missouri. In February 2022, Judge Edmund A. Sargus Jr. denied both motions and kept the case in Ohio.2vLex. Olin-Marquez v. Arrow Senior Living Mgmt., LLC
The court then conditionally certified an FLSA collective action covering all current and former hourly, non-exempt employees at any Arrow community in Ohio who either had automatic meal-break deductions taken during weeks they worked 40 or more hours, or who received nondiscretionary bonus payments during overtime weeks, going back to June 2018.3CaseMine. Olin-Marquez v. Arrow Senior Living Mgmt., LLC, Conditional Certification Order
Roberts v. Arrow Senior Living: The Missouri Companion Case
The Sixth Circuit’s ruling in Canaday v. Anthem Cos. limited collective actions to employees within the court’s jurisdiction, so a second case was needed to reach Arrow workers outside Ohio. Deborah Roberts, a former care partner, and Jadan Cook, a former med-tech, filed suit in November 2021 in the Eastern District of Missouri, raising the same meal-break and bonus-calculation allegations under the FLSA and Missouri wage law.4PacerMonitor. Roberts et al. v. Arrow Senior Living Management, LLC5Bankrupt.com. Roberts et al. v. Arrow Senior Living Management, LLC Filing
Roberts was conditionally certified in January 2022. In August 2022 the parties agreed to consolidate the two cases, and the court transferred Roberts to the Southern District of Ohio for settlement purposes, where it was opened on a new docket.4PacerMonitor. Roberts et al. v. Arrow Senior Living Management, LLC
Kelly v. Arrow Senior Living: The Pending Settlement
A broader FLSA case was filed on October 27, 2025, by Ashley Kelly in the Eastern District of Missouri. Kelly v. Arrow Senior Living Management, LLC et al. names 35 Arrow-affiliated LLCs as defendants, covering communities across Missouri, Ohio, Iowa, Kansas, and other states where Arrow operates.6PacerMonitor. Kelly v. Arrow Senior Living Management, LLC et al.
The list of entity defendants gives a sense of the geographic reach: LLCs tied to Arrow communities in Blue Springs, Columbia, Joplin, Lee’s Summit, Springfield, Wentzville, and St. Charles in Missouri; in Solon, Stow, Strongsville, Westlake, Willoughby, North Royalton, and other Ohio cities; and in Ankeny, Iowa, and Bloomington, among others.6PacerMonitor. Kelly v. Arrow Senior Living Management, LLC et al.
On May 8, 2026, the parties filed a joint notice of settlement. Five days later, Kelly filed an unopposed motion asking the court to approve the settlement agreement. As of mid-2026, the case is awaiting judicial approval, and the settlement terms have not been publicly disclosed.6PacerMonitor. Kelly v. Arrow Senior Living Management, LLC et al.
Other Lawsuits and Charges Against Arrow
Wage-and-hour claims are the largest thread, but not the only one.
Watson: Title VII Discrimination
Dana Watson filed a pro se employment discrimination suit against Arrow Senior Living The Boulevard of St. Charles in September 2024 under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, citing a right-to-sue letter from the EEOC.7PacerMonitor. Watson v. Arrow Senior Living The Boulevard of St. Charles The district court dismissed the case without prejudice in August 2025 for insufficient service, but on March 6, 2026, the Eighth Circuit vacated that dismissal, holding that the trial judge should have considered a discretionary extension for Watson to complete service rather than stopping at the “good cause” standard.8U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. Watson v. Arrow Senior Living The Boulevard of St. Charles, No. 25-2930 The case was reopened on remand in April 2026, Arrow filed an answer in May, and a scheduling conference is set for late July 2026.
Latten: Age Discrimination
Latten v. Arrow Senior Living Solon, LLC et al., an age discrimination case filed in 2025 in the Northern District of Ohio, was resolved on May 27, 2026, through a stipulated dismissal with prejudice entered by Judge Patricia A. Gaughan. The terms were not disclosed in the court record.9PacerMonitor. Latten v. Arrow Senior Living Solon, LLC et al.
NLRB Charge
An unfair labor practice charge was filed with the National Labor Relations Board’s Cleveland regional office on July 18, 2022, against Arrow Senior Living Management LLC, Arrow Senior Living Stow LLC, and Omni Allen Road, LLC (doing business as Vitalia Senior Residences at Stow). It alleges a violation of Section 8(a)(1) of the National Labor Relations Act for maintaining coercive workplace rules. The charge is listed as open.10National Labor Relations Board. Case 08-CA-299576
Benfield: Copyright Infringement
In December 2025, Dale Benfield filed a copyright infringement suit against Arrow Senior Living Management LLC, CEO Stephanie Harris, and two affiliated entities in the Western District of Arkansas. Several other Arrow-related entity defendants were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction in February 2026, and the remaining case is in discovery with a protective order in place.11PacerMonitor. Benfield v. Arrow Senior Living, LLC et al.
Who Arrow Senior Living Is
Arrow Senior Living was founded in 2009 by Stephanie Harris, who had earlier established the parent company, Turnaround Solutions, in 2005 while attending Saint Louis University School of Law.12Senior Housing News. Changemakers: Stephanie Harris, CEO and Principal, Arrow Senior Living13Senior Housing News. How Arrow Senior Living Is Future-Proofing Operations14Arrow Senior Living. Our Team Arrow has not publicly commented on the wage-and-hour litigation.