Cordova et al v. R&A Oysters, Inc. et al
Order granting 112 Unopposed MOTION Approval of Acceptance of Amended Rule 68 Offer of Judgment and Entry of Final Judgment. The settlement is approved. The parties are to submit a proposed stipulated judgment by 3/15/2016. Signed by Chief Judge William H. Steele on 3/1/2016. (tgw)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
MIGUEL ANGEL FUENTES
CORDOVA, et al., etc.,
R & A OYSTERS, INC., et al.,
) CIVIL ACTION 14-0462-WS-M
This matter is before the Court on the motion of eighteen plaintiffs and optin plaintiffs “for approval of acceptance of defendants’ amended Rule 68 offer of
judgment and entry of judgment” on their FLSA claim. (Doc. 112).1 The
defendants do not oppose the motion and agree both that the settlement is fair and
reasonable and that judgment as to the FLSA claim should be entered pursuant to
Rule 54(b). (Id. at 2).
“Other than a section 216(c) payment supervised by the Department of
Labor, there is only one context in which compromises of FLSA back wage or
liquidated damage claims may be allowed: a stipulated judgment entered by a
court which has determined that a settlement proposed by an employer and
employees, in a suit brought by the employees under the FLSA, is a fair and
reasonable resolution of a bona fide dispute over FLSA provisions.” Lynn’s Food
Stores v. United States, 679 F.2d 1350, 1355 (11th Cir. 1982); accord Nall v. MalMotels, Inc., 723 F.3d 1304, 1307-08 (11th Cir. 2013) (under Lynn’s Food Stores,
which “applies to settlements between former employees and employers” as well
as current employees, an FLSA settlement not made under the supervision of the
The parties anticipate a similar motion shortly as to the other three opt-in
plaintiffs. (Doc. 112-1 at 2 n.3).
Secretary of Labor “is valid only if the district court entered a ‘stipulated
judgment’ approving it”). The settling plaintiffs bring this motion in compliance
with Lynn’s Food Stores and Nall.
Upon review of the amended complaint, the motion, and the attachments to
the motion, the Court is satisfied that the settlement is fair and reasonable under
the governing standards. The Court also notes that the concerns articulated in
Crabtree v. Volkert, Inc., 2013 WL 593500 (S.D. Ala. 2013), are absent here.
Finally, the Court determines that there is no just reason to delay the entry of final
judgment as to the FLSA claim of these 18 plaintiffs and opt-in plaintiffs.
For the reasons set forth above, the motion is granted and the settlement is
approved. The parties are ordered to submit, on or before March 15, 2016, a
proposed stipulated judgment in accordance with governing law.
DONE and ORDERED this 1st day of March, 2016.
s/ WILLIAM H. STEELE
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?