Adams v. Daytona Resort Group, Inc.
Filing
16
ORDER adopting 14 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 13 Joint MOTION for Settlement Approval and Incorporated Memorandum of Law filed by James Adams. The Joint Motion for Approval of Settlement (Doc. 13) is GRANTED IN PART. The case is DISMISSED with prejudice. The Clerk is DIRECTED to close the file. Signed by Judge Paul G. Byron on 11/14/2017. (MMW)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
ORLANDO DIVISION
JAMES ADAMS,
Plaintiff,
v.
Case No: 6:17-cv-1287-Orl-40KRS
DAYTONA RESORT GROUP, INC.,
Defendant.
/
ORDER
This cause is before the Court on the parties’ Joint Motion for Approval of
Settlement (Doc. 13) filed on October 18, 2017. The United States Magistrate Judge has
submitted a report recommending that the motion be granted in part.
After an independent de novo review of the record in this matter, and noting that
Plaintiff filed a Notice of Non-Objection (Doc. 15) and no objection was timely filed by
Defendant, the Court agrees entirely with the findings of fact and conclusions of law in
the Report and Recommendation.
Therefore, it is ORDERED as follows:
1.
The Report and Recommendation filed October 27, 2017 (Doc. 14), is
ADOPTED and CONFIRMED and made a part of this Order.
2.
The second sentence of paragraph 16 of the Settlement Agreement and
Release of Claims is SEVERED.
3.
The Court FINDS that the parties’ Settlement Agreement and Release of
Claims (Doc. 13-1) is a fair and reasonable resolution of a bona fide dispute under the
FLSA.
4.
The Joint Motion for Approval of Settlement (Doc. 13) is GRANTED IN
5.
The Court DECLINES to reserve jurisdiction to enforce the Settlement
PART.
Agreement.
6.
The case is DISMISSED with prejudice.
7.
The Clerk is DIRECTED to close the file.
DONE AND ORDERED in Orlando, Florida on November 14, 2017.
Copies furnished to:
Counsel of Record
Unrepresented Parties
2
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?