Todd v. Myer Companion Care, LLC

Filing 20

ORDER approving 18 Joint Motion to Approve Settlement Agreement; case dismised with prejudice. Signed by Honorable Susan O. Hickey on August 31, 2016. (cnn)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
EL DORADO DIVISION

VICKI DIANE TODD
v.

PLAINTIFF
Civil No. 1:15-cv-1053

MYER COMPANION CARE, LLC,
D/B/A COMFORT KEEPERS

DEFENDANT
ORDER

Before the Court is the parties’ Joint Motion to Approve Settlement Agreement and
Dismiss Claims with Prejudice. ECF No. 18. The parties seek Court approval of their settlement
agreement that has been submitted to the Court for in camera review.
Plaintiff brought this action against Defendant alleging violations of the Fair Labor
Standards Act (“FLSA”), 29 U.S.C. § 201, et seq., and the Minimum Wage Act of the State of
Arkansas, Ark. Code Ann. § 11-4-201, et seq. The parties have reached an agreement that
resolves all claims in this lawsuit.
Several courts have held that settlement agreements resolving wage claims are subject to
court approval to ensure that the parties are not negotiating around statutory minimum wages.
See, e.g., Cruthis v. Vision’s, No. 4:12-cv-00244, 2014 WL 4092325 (E.D. Ark. Aug. 19, 2014);
Int’l Union, United Auto., Aerospace, and Agric. Implement Workers of Am. V. Gen. Motors
Corp., 497 F.3d 615, 631 (6th Cir. 2007); Lynn’s Food Stores, Inc. v. U.S., 679 F.2d 1350, 1353
(11th Cir. 1982). Other courts have held that court approval of a settlement is not necessary in
cases where the lawsuit is not a collective action, all plaintiffs have been represented by counsel
throughout the entirety of the case, and the parties wish for their agreement to remain private.

Schneider v. Habitat for Humanity Int’l, Inc., No. 5:14-cv-5230, 2015 WL 500835, at *3 (W.D.
Ark. Feb. 5, 2015).
While it appears to the Court that the settlement agreement in this case is of the type that
does not require court approval, the Court has nonetheless reviewed the agreement submitted by
the parties. Upon review, the Court finds that the settlement agreement is fair and reasonable to
Plaintiff and that the compromise between the parties does not frustrate the requirements and
implementation of the FLSA. See Cruthis, at *1. Accordingly, the Court finds that the Joint
Motion to Approve Settlement Agreement and Dismiss Claims with Prejudice (ECF No. 18) is
GRANTED. The confidential settlement agreement is approved, and Plaintiff’s claims against
Defendant are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. The Court shall retain jurisdiction over the
terms of the settlement agreement.
IT IS SO ORDERED, this 31st day of August, 2016.

/s/ Susan O. Hickey
Susan O. Hickey
United States District Judge

2