Moreland v. Denega Inc. et al
Filing
39
ORDER: The parties' Joint Motion to Review and Approve FLSA Settlement and Dismiss Action with Prejudice (Doc. # 38 ) is GRANTED. The parties' settlement is approved. This case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. The Clerk is directed to CLOSE THE CASE. Signed by Judge Virginia M. Hernandez Covington on 5/15/2018. (KAK)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TAMPA DIVISION
WARREN MORELAND, ET AL.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
Case No. 8:18-cv-200-T-33MAP
DENEGA, INC., ET AL.,
Defendants.
______________________________/
ORDER
This matter is before the Court pursuant to the parties’
Joint Motion to Review and Approve FLSA Settlement and Dismiss
Action with Prejudice (Doc. # 38), which was filed on May 14,
2018.
I.
The Court grants the Motion.
Background
Plaintiffs filed this Fair Labor Standards Act case on
January 24, 2018. (Doc. # 1).
Defendants filed an Answer and
Affirmative Defenses on February 16, 2018. (Doc. # 13). On
February 8, 2018, the Court issued its FLSA Scheduling Order,
which also referred the case to a mediation with Mark Hanley,
Esq. (Doc. # 11).
Plaintiffs filed Answers to the Court’s Interrogatories
(Doc. ## 22, 23, 29) and Defendants filed a verified summary
of hours worked and wages paid. (Doc. # 28). On April 19,
2018,
the
mediator
reported
settlement. (Doc. # 32).
that
the
parties
reached
a
At the Court’s direction, the
parties have filed a Motion for Court approval of their
settlement. (Doc. # 38).
II.
Analysis
Plaintiffs allege that Defendants violated the overtime
provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Accordingly, any
settlement reached between the parties is subject to judicial
scrutiny.
See Lynn's Food Stores, Inc. v. United States, 679
F.2d 1350, 1353 (11th Cir. 1982).
The parties have reached a
settlement wherein it is agreed that Plaintiff Warren Moreland
will
receive
$6,000.00
for
unpaid
wages
and
liquidated
damages, Plaintiff Cynthia Edging will receive $7,763.89 for
unpaid wages and liquidated damages, and Plaintiff Richard
Murvin will receive $831.99 for unpaid wages and liquidated
damages.
It has also been agreed that Plaintiffs’ counsel
will receive $12,903.25 in attorney’s fees and costs.
In the Motion, the parties represent that the attorney's
fees to be paid to counsel were negotiated separately and
without regard to the amount to be paid to Plaintiffs for
alleged
FLSA
violations.
Pursuant
to
Bonetti
v.
Embarq
Management Company, 715 F. Supp. 2d 1222, 1228 (M.D. Fla.
2009)
and
other
governing
law,
the
Court
approves
the
compromise reached by the parties in an effort to amicably
settle this case.1
The settlement is fair on its face and
1
In Bonetti, the court explained: "if the parties submit
a proposed FLSA settlement that, (1) constitutes a compromise
of the plaintiff's claims; (2) makes a full and adequate
2
represents a reasonable compromise of the parties' dispute.
Accordingly, it is
ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED:
(1)
The parties’ Joint Motion to Review and Approve FLSA
Settlement and Dismiss Action with Prejudice (Doc. # 38)
is GRANTED.
(2)
The parties' settlement is approved.
This case is
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
(3)
The Clerk is directed to CLOSE THE CASE.
DONE and ORDERED in Chambers, in Tampa, Florida, this
15th day of May, 2018.
disclosure of the terms of settlement, including the factors
and reasons considered in reaching same and justifying the
compromise of the plaintiff's claims; and (3) represents that
the plaintiff's attorneys' fee was agreed upon separately and
without regard to the amount paid to the plaintiff, then,
unless the settlement does not appear reasonable on its face
or there is reason to believe that the plaintiff's recovery
was adversely affected by the amount of fees paid to his
attorney, the Court will approve the settlement without
separately considering the reasonableness of the fee to be
paid to plaintiff's counsel." 715 F. Supp. 2d at 1228.
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?