KNOWLTON
v.
BIG B RANCH, INC.
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court approved the settlement agreement and dismissed the case with prejudice.
Plaintiff sued for unpaid minimum wages under federal and state law. The parties reached a settlement agreement and sought judicial approval. The magi…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse FMWA cases and more on FLexlaw
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 43; Report) entered by the Honorable Joel B. Toomey, United States Magistrate Judge, on June 30, 2020. In the Report, Judge Toomey recommends that the Renewed Unopposed Motion for Judicial Approval of Settlement and Dismissal of Action with Prejudice (Dkt. No. 42; Motion) be granted, the Settlement Agreement and General Release be approved, and that the case be dismissed with prejudice. See Report at 1-2, 8-9. No objections to the Report have been filed, and the time for doing so has now passed. The Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). If no specific objections to findings of facts are filed, the district court is not required to conduct a de novo review of those findings. See Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F. 2d 776, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1993); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). However, the district court must review legal conclusions de novo. See Cooper-Houston v. Southern Ry. Co., 37 F. 3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994); United States v. Rice, No. 2:07-mc-8-FtM-29SPC, 2007 WL 1428615, at * 1 (M.D. Fla. May 14, 2007). The Court has conducted an independent examination of the record in this case and a de novo review of the legal conclusions. Plaintiff filed suit against Defendant for unpaid minimum wages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq.
(FLSA) and the Florida Minimum Wage Act, Fla. Stat. § 448.110 (FMWA). See Complaint (Dkt. No. 8). Thereafter, the parties engaged in settlement negotiations, which resulted in a resolution of the issues and claims raised in this case. See Motion (Dkt. No. 42). Upon review of the record, including the Report, Motion, and Settlement Agreement and General Release, the undersigned concludes that the settlement represents a “reasonable and fair” resolution of Plaintiff’s claims. Accordingly, the Court will accept and adopt Judge Toomey’s Report. In light of the foregoing, it is hereby ORDERED:
1. The Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 43) is ADOPTED as the opinion of the Court. 2. The Renewed Unopposed Motion for Judicial Approval of Settlement and Dismissal of Action with Prejudice (Dkt. No. 42) is GRANTED. 3. For purposes of satisfying the FLSA, the Settlement Agreement and General Release (Dkt. No. 42 at 12-16) is APPROVED.
4. This case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
5. The Clerk of the Court is directed to terminate any pending motions or deadlines as moot and close this file. DONE AND ORDERED in Jacksonville, Florida this 16th day of July, 2020.
United States District Judge
ja Copies to: Counsel of Record
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Marina Cooper-Houston v. S. Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603 (11th Cir. 1994)
- Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776 (11th Cir. 1993)