United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Orlando Division
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
C. IRICK UNITES STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
cause comes before the Court for consideration without oral
argument on the following motion:
JOINT MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT AND DISMISSAL WITH
PREJUDICE (Doc. 20)
November 20, 2017
it is RECOMMENDED that the motion be
GRANTED in part and DENIED in
filed this action against Defendant in July 2016. Doc. 2.
Plaintiff alleged that he worked for Defendant as an
assistant manager between January 2010 and the filing of the
Complaint, earning $11.15 per hour. Id. at
¶¶ 7-8. Plaintiff alleged that Defendant
manipulated Plaintiff's time records by reducing the
number of hours he actually worked so that he was not paid
for all the time he worked, including overtime. Id.
at ¶¶ 9-10, 18, 26-27. Thus, Plaintiff asserted the
following claims against Defendant: Count I - breach of
contract; Count II - unpaid overtime wages in violation of
the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), 29 U.S.C. § 207.
Id. at 3-5.
Court subsequently entered an order compelling the parties to
proceed with arbitration, and administratively closed the
case. Doc. 15. The parties reached a settlement in
September 2017. Doc. 18.
parties filed a Joint Motion for Approval of Settlement and
Dismissal with Prejudice (Motion) and their settlement
agreement (Agreement). Docs. 20; 20-1. The Agreement provides
that Plaintiff will receive $1, 800.00 in unpaid wages, and
$1, 800.00 in liquidated damages, and $200.00 as
consideration for other matters, such as the general release.
Doc. 20-1 at 2-3. The Agreement also provides that Plaintiff
will receive $5, 200.00 in attorney fees and costs.
Id. at 3. The parties argue that the Agreement
represents a fair and reasonable resolution of Plaintiff s
FLSA claim, and request that the Court grant the Motion,
dismiss the Complaint with prejudice, and retain jurisdiction
to enforce the terms of the settlement. Id. at 7.
settlement of a claim for unpaid minimum or overtime wages
under the FLSA may become enforceable by obtaining the
Court's approval of the settlement
agreement. Lynn's Food Stores, Inc. v. U.S.
Dept of Labor, 679 F.2d 1350, 1352-53 (11th Cir. 1982).
The Court, before giving its approval, must scrutinize the
settlement agreement to determine whether it is a fair and
reasonable resolution of a bona fide dispute of plaintiff s
FLSA claims. See Id. at 1353-55. In doing so, the
Court should consider the following nonexclusive factors:
. The existence of collusion behind the
• The complexity, expense, and likely duration of the
• The state of the proceedings and the amount of