Barbee v. Big River Steel, LLC
927 F.3d 1024
8th Cir.2019Background
- Plaintiff Kim Pierce sued Big River Steel alleging unpaid overtime under the FLSA and Arkansas law and later settled the claims with the employer.
- The parties notified the district court of the settlement and submitted the agreement and attorney billing records after the court directed them to do so.
- The district court approved the wage portion of the settlement but independently reduced the amount of agreed attorney fees and entered judgment reflecting the reduced fees.
- Pierce died; her estate administrator Paulette Barbee continued the case and resubmitted a wage-only agreement addressing the court’s wage concerns; the court again approved wages but reduced the settled attorney fees.
- Barbee appealed the court’s modification of the settled attorney fees; Big River Steel did not contest the appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a district court may review and modify attorney fees agreed to in an FLSA settlement | Barbee: Court lacks authority under 29 U.S.C. § 216 to review or alter settled attorney fees negotiated separately | Big River Steel: (implicitly) court had authority to review settlement terms submitted for approval, including fees | The court held § 216 does not require judicial approval of settled attorney fees; district court erred to alter the agreed fee amount |
| Whether judicial review of FLSA settlements (generally) extends to settled fees | Barbee: Even if courts review FLSA settlements, that authority does not extend to separately negotiated fee agreements | Big River Steel: (implicitly) review of settlements includes scrutinizing associated fee arrangements | Court declined to resolve the circuit split on whether all FLSA settlements require approval but held fee-review is not compelled by § 216 |
| Whether dismissal with agreed fees is an unconditional right under Rule 41 | Barbee: Parties’ dismissal and fee agreement are binding; Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) bars court interference absent law to the contrary | Big River Steel: (implicitly) court oversight required when settling FLSA claims submitted for approval | Held: In ordinary private litigation, settled dismissals are effective and the district court lacked authority to override the negotiated fee amount |
| Whether remand should direct entry of judgment for full fee amount | Barbee: Requests remand for entry of judgment awarding the full agreed fee | Big River Steel: Not contesting appeal | Held: Court vacated the portion reducing fees but declined to remand for entry of the full fee judgment because Rule 41 does not permit the district court to take action on the settled fees |
Key Cases Cited
- Melgar v. OK Foods, 902 F.3d 775 (8th Cir.) (standard of review for settled attorney fees discussed)
- D.A. Schulte, Inc. v. Gangi, 328 U.S. 108 (1946) (discusses judicial approval for some FLSA releases)
- Brooklyn Savings Bank v. O'Neil, 324 U.S. 697 (1945) (addresses release and enforcement under FLSA)
- Martin v. Spring Break '83 Prods., LLC, 688 F.3d 247 (5th Cir.) (holds bona fide FLSA disputes can be settled without court or DOL approval)
- Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc., 796 F.3d 199 (2d Cir.) (requires district court or DOL approval to settle FLSA claims)
- Lynn's Food Stores, Inc. v. United States, 679 F.2d 1350 (11th Cir.) (requires approval for FLSA settlements)
- Gardiner v. A.H. Robins Co., 747 F.2d 1180 (8th Cir.) (parties’ settlement/dismissal is ordinarily their prerogative)
- Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424 (1983) (prefers litigants to settle fee amounts to avoid unnecessary litigation)