Chipps v. J.E. Davis Enterprises, Inc. (PLR2)
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER as set forth in following order. Signed by District Judge Pamela L Reeves on 7/21/17. (ABF)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
BRANDY CHIPPS and FORREST FONT, )
individually and on behalf of all others
J.E. DAVIS ENTERPRISES, INC.,
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Before the Court is the parties’ joint motion to approve the settlement agreement. Brandy Davis
and Forrest Font sued J.E. Davis Enterprises Inc. under the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C.
§§ 201–219. Before parties can settle FLSA suits, the court must approve the settlement agreement.
Int’l Union v. Gen. Motors Corp., 497 F.3d 615, 631 (6th Cir. 2007); see also Lynn’s Food Stores
v. United States, 679 F.2d 1350, 1354 (11th Cir. 1982). The settlement agreement will be approved
only if it is “fair, reasonable, and adequate.” Int’l Union, 497 F.3d at 631.
The parties’ settlement agreement is fair, reasonable, and adequate. Five factors guide the
Court’s analysis: the risk of fraud or collusion; the complexity, expense, and likely length of the
suit; the amount of discovery the parties have undertaken; the likelihood of success on the merits;
and the public interest. Id. The Court has reviewed the settlement agreement; the affidavit of James
E. Davis, owner and CEO of J.E. Davis; and the parties’ joint motion. Based on these filings, the
Court finds under the five factors that the settlement involves the resolution of a bona fide dispute
and is fair, reasonable, and adequate. The motion is GRANTED, and the settlement agreement is
APPROVED. This suit is DISMISSED with prejudice except, per the settlement agreement, the
Court retains jurisdiction to enforce the agreement’s terms. See Exact Software of N. Am., Inc. v.
DeMoisey, 718 F.3d 535, 540 (6th Cir. 2013).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
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?