Yeomans v. A & R Naples, Inc., 2:19-cv-140-FtM-38NPM. (2019)
Court: District Court, M.D. Florida
Number: infdco20190827843
Visitors: 3
Filed: Aug. 26, 2019
Latest Update: Aug. 26, 2019
Summary: ORDER 1 SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL , District Judge . Before the Court is Plaintiff Jesse Yeomans' Notice of Settlement. (Doc. 23). Yeomans has sued Defendants A&R Naples, Inc. Cajal Salvador, and Benjamin Bauzon for unpaid wages and overtime under the Fair Labor Standards Act. (Doc. 1). The parties have settled the suit without compromise to Yeomans' claim for wages or liquidated damages. (Doc. 23). And attorneys' fees were negotiated separately from the resolution of Yeomans' claim. (Doc. 2
Summary: ORDER 1 SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL , District Judge . Before the Court is Plaintiff Jesse Yeomans' Notice of Settlement. (Doc. 23). Yeomans has sued Defendants A&R Naples, Inc. Cajal Salvador, and Benjamin Bauzon for unpaid wages and overtime under the Fair Labor Standards Act. (Doc. 1). The parties have settled the suit without compromise to Yeomans' claim for wages or liquidated damages. (Doc. 23). And attorneys' fees were negotiated separately from the resolution of Yeomans' claim. (Doc. 23..
More
ORDER1
SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL, District Judge.
Before the Court is Plaintiff Jesse Yeomans' Notice of Settlement. (Doc. 23). Yeomans has sued Defendants A&R Naples, Inc. Cajal Salvador, and Benjamin Bauzon for unpaid wages and overtime under the Fair Labor Standards Act. (Doc. 1). The parties have settled the suit without compromise to Yeomans' claim for wages or liquidated damages. (Doc. 23). And attorneys' fees were negotiated separately from the resolution of Yeomans' claim. (Doc. 23). The Court thus need not review and approve the settlement for fairness. See Lynn's Food Stores, Inc. v. U.S. Dep't of Labor, 679 F.2d 1350, 1352 (11th Cir. 1982); King v. My Online Neighborhood, Inc., No. 6:06-cv-435-Orl-22JGG, 2007 WL 737575, at *3 (M.D. Fla. Mar. 7, 2007) ("Where the employer offers the plaintiff full compensation on his FLSA claim, no compromise is involved and judicial approval is not required." (citation omitted)). The Court thus administratively closes the case per Local Rule 3.08(b).
Accordingly, it is now
ORDERED:
(1) The Complaint (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED without prejudice.
(2) On or before September 25, 2019, any party may submit a stipulated form of final judgment or request an extension of time to do so, or move to reopen the case upon a showing of good cause. After that deadline, the dismissal will be deemed with prejudice without further order.
(3) The Clerk is DIRECTED to terminate all pending motions and deadlines, and administratively close the case.
DONE and ORDERED.
FootNotes
1. Disclaimer: Documents filed in CM/ECF may contain hyperlinks to other documents or websites. 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 websites, this Court does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide on their websites. Likewise, the Court has no agreements with any of these third parties or their websites. 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.
Source: Leagle
