Graham v. Jet Specialty, Inc.

Filing 39

ORDER GRANTING 36 Motion for Settlement and Approving FLSA Settlement, Dismissed with Prejudice. Signed by Judge David A. Ezra. (lg1)

THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
MIDLAND DIVISION
STACY GRAHAM, on behalf of
§
himself and all others similarly situated, §
§
Plaintiff,
§
§
vs.
§
§
JET SPECIALTY, INC.,
§
§
Defendant.
§

MO-15-CV-135-DAE

ORDER: (1) APPROVING FLSA SETTLEMENT AND
(2) DISMISSNG CASE WTH PREJUDICE
On May 9, 2016, Defendant Jet Specialty Inc. (“Jet” or “Defendant”)
and Plaintiff Stacy Graham, on behalf of himself and seven other Plaintiffs, filed a
Joint Stipulation of Dismissal with Prejudice and Motion for Approval of FLSA
Settlement. (Dkt. # 36.) The Court, for the reasons that follow, APPROVES the
FLSA Settlement, and DISMISSES the suit WITH PREJUDICE.
Jet is an oil well part sales and distribution company which operates
in Texas, New Mexico, and Oklahoma. (“Am. Compl.,” Dkt. # 4 ¶ 19.) This case
arises out of the employment of named Plaintiff Stacy Graham and seven other
opt-in Plaintiffs: Ralph Garcia, James Bates, Robert Martin, Steve Lopez, Clayton
Dutton, Presten Benally, and Jose Acosta. (Dkt. # 12 at 9.) Each Plaintiff was

1

employed within the last three years as a delivery driver at Jet’s Odessa, Texas
location, and was responsible for receiving customer purchase orders from Jet,
loading the ordered parts at the Jet warehouse, and delivering those parts to
customers throughout West Texas. (Dkt. # 19, Ex. A ¶ 6.)
On August 27, 2015, Graham brought suit alleging that delivery
drivers were paid a flat salary and not compensated for time worked in excess of
forty hours per week, despite holding positions that are not exempt from the
overtime pay requirement of the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), 29 U.S.C.
§§ 201–219. (Am. Compl. ¶¶ 3, 15–17; Dkt. # 12 at 3, 10.) Accordingly, Graham
brought this suit to recover unpaid overtime wages. On January 11, 2016, this
Court conditionally certified a class of all persons employed by Jet as delivery
drivers at the Odessa, Texas location in the last three years. (Dkt. # 23 at 12.)
The parties state that after conditional certification, they engaged in
discovery in the form of Rule 26 disclosures, interrogatories, document requests,
and document production. (Dkt. # 36 at 2.) The parties participated in a settlement
conference on April 21, 2016, at which they agreed to resolve the matter without
further litigation. (Id.)
Pursuant to the Settlement Agreement, Jet agrees to create a
settlement fund in the amount of $51,200.00, as consideration for dismissal of the
claims against it, with prejudice against refiling by the Plaintiffs of any future
2

claims for unpaid overtime or minimum wages through May 9, 2016, the date of
the execution of the Settlement Agreement. (Dkt. # 36 at 3, 6.) $23,700.00 of the
Settlement Fund is allocated to resolve the claims of the eight Plaintiffs; $5,949.96
of this amount must be claimed from the United States Department of Labor
(“DOL”), which previously collected funds from Jet pursuant to a wage and hour
investigation.1 (Dkt. # 36 at 4.) The remaining $27,500.00 is allocated to cover
Plaintiffs attorneys’ fees and costs, including the costs associated with the claims
administration process.
“[P]arties may reach private compromises as to FLSA claims where
there is a bona fide dispute as to the amount of hours worked or compensation due.
A release of a party’s rights under the FLSA is enforceable under such
circumstances.” Martinez v. Bohls Bearing Equip. Co., 361 F. Supp. 2d 608, 631
(W.D. Tex. 2005). “FLSA claims may be compromised after the court reviews and
approves a settlement in a private action for back wages under 29 U.S.C.
§ 216(b).” Villeda v. Landry’s Restaurants, Inc., No. H–08–2287, 2009 WL
3233405, at *1 (S.D. Tex. Oct. 7, 2009). “If the settlement reflects ‘a reasonable
compromise over the issues,’ the court may approve it.” Id. (quoting Lynn’s Food
Stores, Inc. v. United States, U.S. Dep’t of Labor, 679 F.2d 1350, 1353 (11th Cr.
1982)).
1

Only Stacy Graham, Clayton Dutton, and Presten Benally will recover from the
DOL pursuant to the Settlement Agreement. (Dkt. # 36 at 4.)
3

Here, the settlement negotiated and signed by the attorneys for the
parties involved reflects a reasonable compromise over the issues. The Motion for
Approval of the FLSA Settlement is GRANTED (Dkt. # 36), and the executed
settlement agreement is hereby APPROVED by this Court (Dkt. # 36, Ex. 1).
Finding that the parties’ stipulation of dismissal (Dkt. # 36) is signed
by counsel for Plaintiffs and Defendant, and otherwise complies with Federal Rule
of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), all claims in the instant suit against Defendant
are hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE pursuant to the settlement
agreement between the parties. The Parties have agreed to bear those costs and
fees not explicitly covered in the settlement agreement.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: Midland, Texas, May 11, 2016.

_____________________________________
David Alan Ezra
Senior United States Distict Judge

4