Note to FLSA Plaintiffs: Hire a Bear-Eating Attorney!

For those of you keeping score, the 11th Circuit has finally weighed in on Lynn's Foods in the FLSA context, a decision in which our very own Judge Huck sat on the panel.

The upshot of it all:  when settling a FLSA claim, you should probably hire an attorney:
 Lynn’s Food did not define the term “stipulated judgment,” and we do not have any decisions defining it in this context. But it takes two (or more) to stipulate, and a judgment to which one side objects is not a stipulated one. When the magistrate judge held an evidentiary hearing on whether to approve the settlement agreement, Nall’s attorney objected to approval, contending that the terms were not fair and reasonable. When a plaintiff’s attorney asks the district court to reject a settlement agreement that was reached without the attorney’s knowledge or participation, whatever else the judgment approving the agreement may be, it is not a “stipulated judgment” within the meaning of Lynn’s Food. Cf. Lynn’s Food, 679 F.2d at 1354 (noting that “[s]ettlements may be permissible in the context of a suit brought by employees under the FLSA” because the employees are “likely to be represented by an attorney who can protect their rights under the statute” when the settlement is reached within the “adversarial context” of a lawsuit).
In other news, WPB attorney Ryon McCabe recently ate a bear (or something like that, I didn't read it too closely).

Happy Tuesday!


  1. Huck in the house!

  2. Happy Tuesday to you too, SFL!

  3. Somebody commented at work today that they thought I was in limbo. I've been bothered ever since.

  4. The whole incident was a giant misunderstanding. I was merely looking for some smokes and beef jerky.


Post a Comment