Garcia v. 8th Avenue Wings, LP

Filing 26

Memorandum Opinion and Order: The court finds that the parties' motion 24 for approval of their settlement agreement should be denied. Therefore, The court ORDERS that the joint motion for approval of the above-referenced settlement agreement be, and is hereby, denied. (Ordered by Senior Judge John McBryde on 12/14/2018) (edm)

U.S. DISTRICT COURT
NORTIJERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

Fl LED
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRIC
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TE
FORT WORTH DIVISION

cou·
s

T

DEC 1 4 2018

§

Plaintiff,

CLERK, U.S. DISTRICT COUlff

§

HECTOR GARCIA,

lly_ _=:-..,---Dcpu1y

§
§

vs.

§

NO. 4: i8'~cV-464-A

§

8TH AVENUE WINGS, LP,

§
§

Defendant.

§

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Came on for consideration the joint motion of plaintiff,
Hector Garcia ("Garcia"), and defendant,

8th Avenue Wings, LLP

("8th Avenue Wings"), for approval of the settlement of Garcia's
Fair Labor Standards Act

("FLSA") claims. Having considered the

motion, the brief attached thereto, the agreement, and the
applicable authorities, the court finds that the motion should be
denied.
I.

Background
On June 12, 2018, Garcia filed a complaint alleging that 8th
Avenue Wings, in violation of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C.

§

201, et seq.,

failed to pay him overtime. On November 2, 2018, and November 7,
2018, 8th Avenue Wings and Garcia, respectively, signed a
settlement agreement. In the agreement,

8th Avenue Wings agreed

to pay Garcia $6,500 as compensation for allegedly unpaid
overtime, liquidated damages, and attorney's fees. In exchange,

Garcia agreed to release 8th Avenue Wings from his claims under
the FLSA. On December 12, 2018, the parties filed a joint motion
for approval of this settlement agreement.
II.
Analysis
A private settlement of a plaintiff's FLSA claims is •an
enforceable resolution of those FLSA claims predicated on a bona
" Martin v. Spring Break

fide dispute about time worked
'83 Prods.' LLC, 688 F.3d 247, 255

(5th Cir. 2012).

The Eleventh Circuit has required the court's approval of a
settlement of FLSA claims. Lynn's Food Stores, Inc. v. United
States, 679 F.2d 1350, 1355 (11th Cir. 1982). In such cases, the
court must determine whether the agreement is fair and
reasonable. Id. The reasonableness inquiry requires the court to
reach the merits of the case and determine whether the plaintiff
is likely to succeed. See Parker v. Anderson,

667 F.2d 1204, 1209

(5th Cir. 1982). But, the Fifth Circuit has held that the court's
approval is not required when the settlement agreement occurred
within the context of a lawsuit and both parties were represented
by counsel. Martin, 688 F.3d at 256 n.10.
Here, the settlement agreement resolves a bona fide dispute
as to whether the FLSA entitles Garcia to overtime payments. The
agreement occurred within the context of a lawsuit, and both

2

parties were represented by counsel when they signed it. As a
result, the agreement is enforceable without the court's
approval.
Were the court required to approve the agreement,

it would

have to conduct a hearing to determine whether the agreement was
fair and reasonable, which would incorporate a hearing on the
merits. The purpose of settlement is to avoid the time and
expense of conducting a trial. Thus, the burdensome process of
approving a settlement agreement would defeat the point of
settlement.
For these reasons, the court finds that the parties' motion
for approval of their settlement agreement should be denied.
Therefore,
The court ORDERS that the joint motion for approval of the
above-referenced settlement agreement be, and is hereby, denied.
SIGNED December 14, 2018.

3