HUFF
v.
BOBCAT NORTH AMERICA, LLC
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 FLSA settlement agreement as fair and reasonable for the opt-in plaintiffs but denied the request to retain jurisdiction.
Plaintiff brought a collective action for unpaid overtime wages under the FLSA. Forty-one plaintiffs opted in, and the parties sought court approval o…
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 Collective Action Certification cases and more on FLexlaw
Plaintiff Steven Huff brought this collective action on behalf of himself and similarly situated individuals, suing his former employers for failure to pay overtime wages under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”). (See Doc. 1.) On March 31, 2020 the Court conditionally certified a 29 U.S.C. § 216(b) class. (Doc. 70.) Forty-one plaintiffs opted-in to this collective action, in addition to Mr. Huff (collectively, “Settlement Collective”). (See Doc. 108-2.) The parties now move for approval of their FLSA settlement agreement under Lynn’s Food Stores, Inc. v. United States ex rel. United States Department of Labor, 679 F. 2d 1350, 1355 (11th Cir. 1982); the opt-in plaintiffs each signed notices of acceptance of the settlement (Doc. 108-2). (Doc. 108 (“Motion”); Doc. 108-1 (“Agreement”).) On referral, U.S. Magistrate Judge Daniel C. Irick recommends granting the Motion in part and approving the Agreement, finding it fair and reasonable. (Doc. 109 (“R&R”).) But he recommends the Court decline to retain jurisdiction over the claims, as requested. (Id. at 9.) The parties do not object to the R&R (Doc. 110), so the Court has examined it only for clear error. See Wiand v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., No. 8:12-cv-557-T-27EAJ, 2016 WL 355490, at *1 (M.D. Fla. Jan. 28, 2016); see also Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 F. App’x 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006). Finding none, the R&R is adopted in its entirety. It is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED: 1. U.S. Magistrate Judge Daniel C. Irick’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 109) is ADOPTED, CONFIRMED, and made a part of this Order. 2. The parties’ Joint Motion to Approve Settlement (Doc. 108) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART: a. The parties’ Settlement Agreement as to FLSA Claims (Doc. 108-1) is found to be a fair and reasonable settlement of the Settlement Collective’s claims under the FLSA;
b. The case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as to the members of the Settlement Collective; c. The case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE as to Nathaniel Rouch (Doc. 36-1) as he did not meet the requirements of the conditional certification order (see Doc. 108, p. 2 n.2);
d. In all other respects, the Motion is DENIED. 3. The Clerk is DIRECTED to terminate all pending motions and close the file. DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers in Orlando, Florida, on January 27, 2021.
Ne Or, ROY B. DALTON JR’ United States District Judge
Copies to: Counsel of Record
3.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- O'Neal v. Am. Shaman Franchise Sys., Inc., 679 F. 2d 1350 (11th Cir. 2026)