Filed: Oct. 22, 2014
Latest Update: Oct. 22, 2014
Summary: ORDER 1 SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL, District Judge. This matter comes before the Court on Joint Motion to Conduct FLSA Settlement Conference Telephonically and Incorporated Memorandum of Law ( Doc. #18 ) filed on October 22, 2014. On September 2, 2014, the Court issued a Scheduling Order requiring, among other things, that the counsels for Plaintiff and Defendant "meet and confer in person in a good faith effort to settle all pending issues, including attorneys' fees and costs." ( Doc. #14, at 2
Summary: ORDER 1 SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL, District Judge. This matter comes before the Court on Joint Motion to Conduct FLSA Settlement Conference Telephonically and Incorporated Memorandum of Law ( Doc. #18 ) filed on October 22, 2014. On September 2, 2014, the Court issued a Scheduling Order requiring, among other things, that the counsels for Plaintiff and Defendant "meet and confer in person in a good faith effort to settle all pending issues, including attorneys' fees and costs." ( Doc. #14, at 2 ..
More
ORDER1
SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL, District Judge.
This matter comes before the Court on Joint Motion to Conduct FLSA Settlement Conference Telephonically and Incorporated Memorandum of Law (Doc. #18) filed on October 22, 2014. On September 2, 2014, the Court issued a Scheduling Order requiring, among other things, that the counsels for Plaintiff and Defendant "meet and confer in person in a good faith effort to settle all pending issues, including attorneys' fees and costs." (Doc. #14, at 2, ¶4). Now, the counsels seek permission to attend this required meeting telephonically because one counsel works in Broward County, Florida and the other counsel works in Lee County, Florida. These counties are both located in south Florida but on opposite coasts. Therefore, the counsels assert they wish to save time, travel costs, and incur less attorney fees for the parties by not traveling to hold a FLSA Settlement Conference in person.
Upon consideration, the Court finds the motion is due to be denied. The Court strongly believes settlement conferences are most effective when attended by the parties and respective counsel in person. The Court is not inclined to adjust the terms of the Scheduling Order simply because a counsel will have to travel from one coast of Florida to the other. See Rafer v. Pursley, No. 8:09-cv-109-T-33TGW, 2009 WL 1913272, at *1 (M.D. Fla. July 1, 2009) (denying a motion to attend FLSA settlement conference telephonically because the parties counsel lived on opposite coasts).
Accordingly, it is now
ORDERED:
Joint Motion to Conduct FLSA Settlement Conference Telephonically and Incorporated Memorandum of Law (Doc. #18) is DENIED.
DONE and ORDERED.
FootNotes
1. Disclaimer: Documents filed in CM/ECF may contain hyperlinks to other documents or Web sites. These hyperlinks are provided only for users' convenience. Users are cautioned that hyperlinked documents in CM/ECF are subject to PACER fees. By allowing hyperlinks to other Web sites, this court does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide on their Web sites. Likewise, the court has no agreements with any of these third parties or their Web sites. The court accepts no responsibility for the availability or functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases to work or directs the user to some other site does not affect the opinion of the court.
