Amrhein v. Regency Management Services, LLC, et al.
Filing
76
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting #74 Third Joint Motion for approval of settlement; directing Plaintiffs' counsel will receive attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to settlement agreement. Signed by Magistrate Judge Susan K. Gauvey on 5/6/14. (dass, Deputy Clerk)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND
DEBORAH AMRHEIN, et al.,
*
Plaintiffs
*
v.
*
REGENCY MANAGEMENT SERVICES,
LLC, et al.,
CIVIL NO.
SKG-13-1114
*
*
Defendants.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Now pending before the Court is the parties’ Third Amended
Joint
Motion
for
Order
Approving
Settlement
(ECF
No.
74).
Having considered the parties’ Third Amended Joint Motion, and
for the reasons discussed herein, the Court hereby GRANTS the
parties’ request for approval of the settlement of the claims of
Matthew Jamison, Aaron Leventhal, and Herb Moran.1
When
considering
FLSA
settlement
agreements,
district
courts in the Fourth Circuit generally follow the reasoning in
Lynn’s Food Stores, Inc. v. United States, 679 F.2d 1350 (11th
Cir. 1982).
Saman v. LBDP, Inc., No. DKC 12-1083, 2013 WL
1
By Order dated April 21, 2014, the Court granted the Second Amended Joint
Motion for Order Approving Settlement (ECF No. 65-1) as to Matthew Jamison
and held the motion sub curia as to Herb Moran and Aaron Leventhal, for
submission of additional explanation as to the reasonableness of the
settlement amount, in light of their claimed damages.
(ECF No. 69).
By
their present motion, the parties have supplied the requested supplemental
information and explanation as to the settlement terms of Herb Moran and
Aaron Leventhal.
1
2949047 (D. Md. June 13, 2013).
There, the court found that an
FLSA settlement should generally be approved if it reflects a
“fair and reasonable resolution of a bona fide dispute over FLSA
provisions.”
requesting
Lynn’s Food Stores, 679 F.2d at
approval
of
a
proposed
As such, parties
settlement
must
“provide
enough information for the court to examine the bonafides of the
dispute.”
Kianpour v. Rest. Zone, Inc., No. DKC 11-0802, 2011
WL 5375082, at *2 (D. Md. Nov. 4, 2011).
Third
Amended
Motion
has
supplied
the
Here, the parties’
Court
with
enough
information to examine the bonafides of the dispute between the
parties.
As such, the Court hereby approves the parties’ agreed
to settlement in the following amounts:
Matthew Jameson —— $6,000.00
Herb Moran —— $3,000.00
Aaron Leventhal —— $7,000.00
Next,
addition
29
to
U.S.C.
any
§
216(b)
judgment
expressly
awarded
to
provides
the
that
“in
plaintiff
or
plaintiffs,” the Court must “allow a reasonable attorney’s fee
to be paid by the defendant, and costs of the action.”
Of
course, in the context of a settlement, judgment is not entered
on behalf of the plaintiff or plaintiffs.
Yet, “it would make
little sense to require the amount of the fees awarded to be
reasonable where the plaintiffs prevail on the merits, but to
abandon that requirement altogether where the parties agree to
2
settle
the
case.”
Accordingly,
when
Kianpour,
considering
2011
a
WL
proposed
5375082,
fee
at
award,
*3.
“the
reasonableness of the fee award proposed in an FLSA settlement
must be independently assessed, regardless of whether there is
any suggestion that a “conflict of interest taints the amount
the
wronged
employee
recovers
Id. (citations omitted).
traditional
lodestar
under
a
settlement
agreement.”
In doing so, the Court utilizes the
method:
multiplying
the
number
of
hours
reasonably expended by reasonable hourly rate and considering
the Barber v. Kimbrell factors.
Id. at *3 (citing Robinson v.
Equifax Info. Serv., LLC, 560 F.3d 235, 243 (4th Cir. 2009)).
Plaintiffs’
counsel
has
provided
the
Court
with
sufficient
information to assess the reasonableness of the hours expended
and
hourly
attorney.
the
rates
charged
by
each
individual
Plaintiffs’
As such, the Court further ORDERS that pursuant to
settlement
agreement,
Plaintiffs’
counsel
will
receive
$6,000.00 in attorneys’ fees and costs.
It is so ORDERED.
Date: __5/06/2014__
_______________/s/______________
Susan K. Gauvey
United States Magistrate Judge
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?