Arteaga v. Steak N Shake Operations, Inc.

Filing 30

ORDER dismissing case Signed by Judge Roy B. Dalton, Jr. on 11/29/2017. (VMF)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
ORLANDO DIVISION
KATHERINE ARTEAGA,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 6:16-cv-2045-Orl-37TBS

STEAK N SHAKE OPERATIONS, INC.,
Defendant.
_____________________________________
ORDER
Plaintiff initiated this action against her former employer alleging, among other
things, that it failed to pay her overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standards
Act (“FLSA”). (Doc. 2.) The parties then unsuccessfully moved for approval of their
settlement agreement under Lynn’s Food Stores, Inc. v. United States ex rel. United States
Department of Labor, 679 F.2d 1350 (11th Cir. 1982). (See Docs. 20, 26.) In rejecting the
parties’ second settlement agreement, the Court advised them of several options available
to them under controlling law; one such option was to file a stipulation of dismissal
without prejudice. (Doc. 28.) On November 28, 2017, the parties filed a joint stipulation
of dismissal without prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii).
(Doc. 29 (“Stipulation”).)
Rule 41(a) allows for dismissal of an action without court order subject to “any
applicable federal statute.” In most cases, a stipulation [of dismissal] is self-executing and
dismisses the case upon it becoming effective—that is, on “filing unless it explicitly
-1-

conditions its effectiveness on a subsequent occurrence.” Love v. Wal-Mart Stores,
865 F.3d 1322, 1325 (11th Cir. 2017) (quoting Anago Franchising, Inc. v. Shaz, LLC, 677 F.3d
1272, 1278 (11th Cir. 2012)). Here, the Stipulation provided no conditions to its
effectiveness; so it became effective on filing.
FLSA cases are not most cases, and under Lynn’s Food resolution of FLSA claims
generally requires judicial approval even where the parties have stipulated to dismissal
under Rule 41. See Dees v. Hydradry, Inc., 706 F. Supp. 2d 1227, 1247 (M.D. Fla. 2010). But
courts have held that judicial approval is not required where parties stipulate to dismissal
without

prejudice.

See

Farias

v.

Trade

Secrets,

LLC,

No. 6:14-cv-880-Orl-37GJK

2014 WL8771497, at *1 (M.D. Fla. Sept. 18, 2014); see also Perez-Nunez v. N. Broward Hosp.
Dist., 609 F. Supp. 2d 1319, 1320 (S.D. Fla. 2009).
In light of the Stipulation, no further action from the Court is required, and the
Clerk is DIRECTED to close the file. The parties are reminded that absent judicial
approval any settlement agreement is unenforceable.
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers in Orlando, Florida, on November 29, 2017.

Copies to:
Counsel of Record

-2-