Anderson v. Lykes Cartage Company, Inc.
6:17-cv-00657
M.D. Fla.Oct 17, 2017Background
- Plaintiff Daniel Anderson sued Lykes Cartage Company LLC under the FLSA for unpaid overtime arising from his work as a dispatcher (July 2014–Jan 2016).
- Complaint alleged routine overtime in excess of 40 hours/week and unlawful failure to pay overtime wages.
- Parties negotiated a settlement: Plaintiff to receive $1,750 in unpaid wages and $1,750 in liquidated damages; counsel to receive $3,500 for fees and costs.
- Parties represented the fee payment was negotiated separately and did not affect the amount paid to Plaintiff.
- Magistrate Judge reviewed the settlement under Lynn’s Food Stores and related standards and recommended approval and dismissal with prejudice.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the FLSA settlement resolves a bona fide dispute and is fair and reasonable | Anderson contends the settlement fairly compensates disputed unpaid overtime given litigation risks | Lykes maintains the negotiated settlement resolves disputed coverage and liability and avoids litigation costs | Court: Settlement reflects reasonable compromise of bona fide FLSA dispute; recommended approval |
| Whether the release is overbroad and waives unrelated claims | Anderson limited the release to FLSA violations alleged in the complaint | Lykes argues the release is appropriate and limited to the wage claim | Court: Release is limited to the FLSA claims in the complaint and does not undermine fairness |
| Whether attorney fees are reasonable and present a conflict of interest | Anderson’s counsel will receive $3,500; parties state fees were negotiated separately | Lykes concurs fees were negotiated separately and did not affect Plaintiff’s recovery | Court: Representation that fees were negotiated separately satisfies Bonetti; no apparent conflict; fees reasoned acceptable |
| Whether court approval is required for FLSA settlement | Anderson seeks judicial approval consistent with precedent | Lykes agrees approval is appropriate to make settlement enforceable | Court: Approval required under Lynn’s Food Stores; recommended grant of motion and dismissal with prejudice |
Key Cases Cited
- Lynn’s Food Stores, Inc. v. U.S. Dep’t of Labor, 679 F.2d 1350 (11th Cir. 1982) (judicial approval required for private FLSA settlements to be enforceable)
- Leverso v. SouthTrust Bank of Ala., Nat’l Assoc., 18 F.3d 1527 (11th Cir. 1994) (factors to evaluate fairness of settlement)
- Cotton v. Hinton, 559 F.2d 1326 (5th Cir. 1977) (strong federal policy favoring settlements)
- Bonetti v. Embarq Mgmt. Co., 715 F. Supp. 2d 1222 (M.D. Fla. 2009) (attorney-fee separate-negotiation approach acceptable for FLSA settlements)
- Silva v. Miller, [citation="307 F. App'x 349"] (11th Cir. 2009) (courts must ensure fee awards do not create a conflict diminishing plaintiff recovery)
- Bonner v. City of Prichard, 661 F.2d 1206 (11th Cir. 1981) (Eleventh Circuit adoption of pre-1981 Fifth Circuit precedent)