Cortazar-Garcia v. Wrist Aficionado Miami, LLC, 1:21-cv-24366

Background

Plaintiff Daniela Cortazar‑Garcia sued Wrist Aficionado Miami, LLC and three individual defendants alleging harassment, FLSA unpaid minimum and overtime wages, retaliation, and unpaid wages/commissions; she sought roughly $61,834.40.
Plaintiff alleged she worked 15 overtime hours weekly (Jan 1–Nov 11, 2021) and unpaid wages/commissions for Nov 8–11, 2021.
Parties negotiated an early settlement: defendants to pay $39,500 (including $14,000 to plaintiff and $25,500 in liquidated damages/interest) plus $7,000 for plaintiff’s counsel; defendants also agreed to terminate plaintiff’s confidentiality/non‑compete agreement and provide an employment letter.
The parties added a confidentiality clause by amendment and sought court approval under Lynn’s and dismissal with prejudice; they also requested retention of jurisdiction to enforce the settlement.
After a May 18, 2022 fairness hearing, the magistrate judge recommended approving the settlement as a fair and reasonable compromise of a bona fide FLSA dispute, approved the attorney’s fees, allowed confidentiality (found good cause), but recommended the court decline to retain jurisdiction for enforcement.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Fairness of the FLSA settlement under Lynn’s	Settlement is a reasonable, early compromise resolving bona fide disputes over hours and pay; amount is acceptable.	There is a bona fide disputed computation (hours, variable commissions and rates); settlement avoids complex, costly litigation.	Approved: magistrate found settlement a fair and reasonable compromise under Lynn’s.
Attorney’s fees — amount and separation from plaintiff recovery	$7,000 was negotiated separately and did not reduce plaintiff’s agreed recovery.	Same representation; counsel represented fee was separately negotiated.	Approved: court accepted parties’ representation and found the fee reasonable.
Mutual releases / scope of release	Plaintiff limited release to FLSA claims; release and other nonmonetary consideration (termination of non‑compete, employment letter) justified inclusion.	Defendants sought mutual releases; parties said releases were part of negotiated deal.	Approved: narrow FLSA release and mutual releases found not to undermine fairness given consideration.
No‑reemployment clause (waiver of future employment)	Plaintiff does not want reemployment and understands clause; it facilitated settlement.	Clause is material to defendants; facilitated resolution.	Approved: clause not unfair here despite no explicit separate monetary consideration because plaintiff understood and did not seek rehire.
Confidentiality of settlement & retention of jurisdiction	Plaintiff sought confidentiality for industry/ reputational reasons; parties agreed confidentiality was material.	Defendants agreed; parties asked court to retain jurisdiction.	Confidentiality approved (good cause shown); court recommended NOT retaining federal jurisdiction—breach claims to be litigated in state court.

Key Cases Cited

Lynn’s Food Stores, Inc. v. United States, 679 F.2d 1350 (11th Cir. 1982) (authorizes court scrutiny and approval of private FLSA settlements when they are reasonable compromises of bona fide disputes).
Barrentine v. Arkansas‑Best Freight Sys., Inc., 450 U.S. 728 (1981) (FLSA rights mandatory and cannot be waived by contract).
Leverso v. SouthTrust Bank of Ala., Nat’l Ass’n, 18 F.3d 1527 (11th Cir. 1994) (factors for assessing fairness of settlements).
Bonetti v. Embarq Mgmt. Co., 715 F. Supp. 2d 1222 (M.D. Fla. 2009) (court may accept parties’ representation that fees were negotiated separately when approving FLSA settlement).
Norman v. Housing Auth. of Montgomery, 836 F.2d 1292 (11th Cir. 1988) (courts may rely on their own experience to evaluate reasonableness of attorney’s fees).
Anago Franchising, Inc. v. Shaz, LLC, 677 F.3d 1272 (11th Cir. 2012) (court must act to retain jurisdiction to enforce settlement; parties’ agreement alone insufficient).
Dees v. Hydradry, Inc., 706 F. Supp. 2d 1227 (M.D. Fla. 2010) (discussion of factors and presumption favoring settlement fairness in FLSA cases).