Gavric v. Regal Automotive Group, Inc.

Filing 75

ORDER: The parties' Joint Motion to Dismiss Count I of the Complaint (Doc. # 68) is GRANTED. As to Plaintiff Spaso Gavric, Count I of the Complaint is dismissed without prejudice. Pursuant to the parties' joint stipulation of dismissa l (Doc. # 70), Counts II through V of the Complaint are dismissed with prejudice as to Plaintiff Spaso Gavric. The settlement between Gavric and Regal is approved. The Court terminates Gavric as a party. This case remains stayed as to opt-in plaint iffs Christopher Mitchell, Timothy Locke, and Edward Perry. The parties are directed to continue filing joint status reports on the arbitration every 60 days until the arbitration has concluded. The Clerk is directed to administratively close this case. Signed by Judge Virginia M. Hernandez Covington on 5/9/2022. (SGM)

Case 8:20-cv-02978-VMC-AAS Document 75 Filed 05/09/22 Page 1 of 6 PageID 362

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TAMPA DIVISION
SPASO GAVRIC,
individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 8:20-cv-2978-VMC-AAS

REGAL AUTOMOTIVE GROUP, INC.,
Defendant.
______________________________/

ORDER

This matter is before the Court pursuant to the parties’
Joint Motion for Dismissal of Count I of the Complaint (Doc.
# 68), the parties’ Joint Stipulation of Dismissal (Doc. #
70), and their response to the Court’s order to show cause.
(Doc. # 72). For the reasons stated below, the Court approves
the parties’ settlement.
I.

Background
On December 15, 2020, Plaintiff Spaso Gavric filed the

instant lawsuit against his former employer, Defendant Regal
Automotive Group, Inc., alleging that Regal failed to pay him
and other members of the putative class their rightfully
earned compensation. (Doc. # 1). Gavric brought claims for
(1) failure to pay minimum wage under the Fair Labor Standards

1

Case 8:20-cv-02978-VMC-AAS Document 75 Filed 05/09/22 Page 2 of 6 PageID 363

Act (FLSA) (Count I); (2) violation of the Florida Minimum
Wage Act (FMWA) (Count II); (3) breach of contract (Count
III); (4) breach of the implied covenant of good faith and
fair dealing (Count IV); and (5) “unpaid wages” (Count V).
(Id.). The common law claims advanced in Counts III, IV, and
V all centered upon Regal’s alleged failure to pay Gavric
proper commissions as a car salesman. See (Doc. # 66 at 1).
Regal filed its answer on February 9, 2021. (Doc. # 12).
The case proceeded through Court-ordered discovery and a
mediation conference, which resulted in an impasse. During
the litigation, three individuals joined the case as opt-in
plaintiffs, but the Court directed those three individuals to
submit their claims to arbitration, and the case was stayed
as to those opt-in plaintiffs. 1 (Doc. # 47). The instant
settlement agreement is just between Gavric and Regal.
On March 4, 2022, the parties jointly informed the Court
that they had reached a settlement in principle and sought
the Court’s direction as to how to proceed. (Doc. # 66).
Because this case involved the negotiated resolution of FLSA
minimum-wage claims, the Court directed the parties to file

According to the parties’ latest status report, the
arbitration proceedings as to the three opt-in plaintiffs are
ongoing. (Doc. # 74).
1

2

Case 8:20-cv-02978-VMC-AAS Document 75 Filed 05/09/22 Page 3 of 6 PageID 364

a motion for settlement approval, as required by the law in
this Circuit. (Doc. # 67). On March 22, 2022, the parties
filed a joint Motion to Dismiss Count I of the Complaint.
(Doc. # 68). The Court deferred ruling because, in order to
ensure the fairness of the parties’ negotiated resolution of
the FLSA claim, it was necessary to review the parties’
settlement agreement as to the other counts in the complaint.
(Doc. # 69). The parties instead filed a Joint Stipulation of
Dismissal, wherein they stipulated to dismissal of Counts II
through V with prejudice and stipulated to dismissal of Count
I (the FLSA claim) without prejudice. (Doc. # 70). In its
April 22, 2022, order, the Court explained that this was
inappropriate and directed the parties to show cause as to
why sanctions should not be imposed for failure to follow a
Court order. (Doc. # 71). The parties responded to that show
cause order, representing that their actions were the result
of a misunderstanding of the Court’s directive and attaching
the required settlement agreement. (Doc. # 72).
II.

Analysis
Gavric alleges that Regal violated the minimum-wage

provisions of the FLSA. 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,
3

Case 8:20-cv-02978-VMC-AAS Document 75 Filed 05/09/22 Page 4 of 6 PageID 365

1353 (11th Cir. 1982). The parties have reached a settlement
wherein it is agreed that Gavric will receive $26,671.25 in
total,

which

consists

of

two

payments

of

approximately

$13,335 each. (Doc. # 72-1 at 1-2). It has also been agreed
that Gavric’s counsel will receive $19,828.75 in attorney’s
fees and costs. (Id.).
While

the

settlement

agreement

states

that

“this

settlement provides [Gavric] the full amount of his minimum
wage damages or payments claimed in Count II of the Complaint
relating

to

the

Florida

Minimum

Wage

Act”

and

that

the

agreement does not pertain to the settlement of Gavric’s FLSA
minimum-wage claim in Count I of the Complaint (Id. at 2),
the parties had previously represented that the resolution of
the state minimum-wage claim would “de facto resolve any
potential FLSA claim.” (Doc. # 68 at 3). The parties have
reached this settlement due to the potential difficulty of
Gavric prevailing as to Count I, the small amount of damages
recoverable as to Count I, and their mutual wish to avoid the
costs and distraction of continued litigation. (Id.).
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

4

Case 8:20-cv-02978-VMC-AAS Document 75 Filed 05/09/22 Page 5 of 6 PageID 366

in an effort to amicably settle this case. 1 The settlement is
fair on its face and represents a reasonable compromise of the
parties’ dispute. In accordance with the parties’ request,
the Court will dismiss the FLSA claim without prejudice. (Doc.
# 72 at 5).
Finally,

the

Court

has

reviewed

the

parties’

joint

response to the order to show cause. (Doc. # 72). In its
discretion, and based upon the parties’ representations that
their actions were not taken in an active effort to undermine
the Court’s orders, the Court declines to impose sanctions.
Accordingly, it is
ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that:

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 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.
1

5

Case 8:20-cv-02978-VMC-AAS Document 75 Filed 05/09/22 Page 6 of 6 PageID 367

(1)

The parties’ Joint Motion to Dismiss Count I of the
Complaint (Doc. # 68) is GRANTED. As to Plaintiff Spaso
Gavric, Count I of the Complaint is dismissed without
prejudice.

(2)

Pursuant to the parties’ joint stipulation of dismissal
(Doc. # 70), Counts II through V of the Complaint are
dismissed with prejudice as to Plaintiff Spaso Gavric.

(3)

The settlement between Gavric and Regal is approved. The
Court terminates Gavric as a party.

(4)

This

case

remains

stayed

as

to

opt-in

plaintiffs

Christopher Mitchell, Timothy Locke, and Edward Perry.
The parties are directed to continue filing joint status
reports on the arbitration every 60 days until the
arbitration has concluded.
(5)

The Clerk is directed to administratively close this
case.
DONE and ORDERED in Chambers, in Tampa, Florida, this

9th day of May, 2022.

6