Happ et al v. Boselli Investments Arvada Two LLC d/b/a McDonalds

Filing 47

ORDER Approving Confidential Settlement. The 43 Joint Motion for Approval of Confidential Settlement and Dismissal with Prejudice is granted in part and denied in part. By Judge Robert E. Blackburn on 2/26/2014.(klyon, )

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF COLORADO Judge Robert E. Blackburn Civil Action No. 13-cv-01406-REB-KLM KATLIN HAPP, MARK ANTHONY TOY, and BRANDEE STECKLEIN, Plaintiffs, v. BOSELLI INVESTMENTS ARVADA TWO LLC, d/b/a McDonalds, Defendant. ORDER APPROVING CONFIDENTIAL SETTLEMENT Blackburn, J. This matter is before me on the Joint Motion for Approval of Confidential Settlement and Dismissal with Prejudice [#43]1 filed February 20, 2014. The motion is granted. The plaintiffs assert claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), the Colorado Wage Act, and Colorado common law. The plaintiffs seek to recover, inter alia, overtime wages allegedly owed to them. In response, the defendant contends the plaintiffs do not have valid claims. The parties have reached a resolution of this dispute and have entered into a confidential settlement agreements. Generally, settlements of claims under the FLSA are not considered to be 1 “[#43]” is an example of the convention I use to identify the docket number assigned to a specific paper by the court’s case management and electronic case filing system (CM/ECF). I use this convention throughout this order. effective absent court approval. See, e.g., Lynn's Food Stores v. United States, 679 F.2d 1350, 1353 (11th Cir.1982); Peter v. Care 2000 Home Healthcare Servs. of Hutchinson, Inc. , CIV.A. 11-1328-KHV, 2013 WL 441069, *1 (D. Kan. Feb. 5, 2013). A FLSA settlement may be approved if the court finds that “(1) the litigation involves a bona fide dispute, (2) the proposed settlement is fair and equitable to all parties concerned and (3) the proposed settlement contains an award of reasonable attorney fees.” Peter, 2013 WL 441069, *1 (citing Lynn's Food Stores, 679 F.2d at 1354). I have reviewed the proposed settlement agreements. I find and conclude that this litigation involves a bona fide dispute, the proposed settlements are fair and equitable to all parties, and each of the proposed settlements contain an award of reasonable attorney fees. THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED as follows: 1. That the Joint Motion for Approval of Confidential Settlement and Dismissal with Prejudice [#43] filed February 20, 2014, is GRANTED in part; 2. That the confidential settlement agreements [#42, #42-1, & #42-2] of the parties are APPROVED; 3. That the Joint Motion for Approval of Confidential Settlement and Dismissal with Prejudice [#43] filed February 20, 2014, is DENIED to the extent the motion can be read to request that this case be dismissed with prejudice; and 2 4. That the court SHALL ADDRESS the dismissal of this case when the parties file their agreed stipulation for dismissal with prejudice. Dated February 26, 2014, at Denver, Colorado. BY THE COURT: 3

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?