Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-00918/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-00918-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 710
Nature of Suit: Fair Labor Standards Act
Cause of Action: 29:201 Fair Labor Standards Act

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

STIPULATION RE APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT Adler v. City of South Lake Tahoe

AGREEMENT AND DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE 2:05-CV-00918-MCE-GGH 

AND [PROPOSED] ORDER THEREON 

34714.1 SO120-011 

DAVID P. MASTAGNI, ESQ. (SBN 57721) 

DAVID E. MASTAGNI, ESQ. (SBN 204244) 

WILL M. YAMADA, ESQ. (SBN 226669) 

MASTAGNI, HOLSTEDT, AMICK, 

MILLER, JOHNSEN & UHRHAMMER 

A Professional Corporation

1912 AI@ Street 

Sacramento, California 95814 

Telephone: (916) 446-4692 

Facsimile: (916) 447-4614 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

JOSH ADLER, DAVID ALLEN, 

LEONA ALLEN, MARK ALLEN, 

SCHYLER BEATY, RICHARD 

CANALE, LINDA CLARK, 

MICHAEL DENTE, KAREN 

EXTRUM, RHETT GANN, 

ROBERT HEINDL, ROBERT 

HIGHT III, THERESA HIGHT, 

JESSICA HLEBAKOS, ROBERT 

HUMPHREY, REBECCA INMAN, 

DONNA KINGMAN-SILVA, 

BRYAN KUHLMANN, SHANNON 

LANEY, DEANNA LEWIS, RICK 

MARTINEZ, BRIAN MCGUCKIN, 

ALLEN MOLESWORTH, 

CHARLES OWENS, JEFF 

REAGAN, ROBERT REFER, KORY 

RODRIGUEZ, ALEX 

SCHUMACHER, BRODIE 

SEAGRAVE, CANDICE SILVA, 

CHRISTINE SNEAD, ROD ST. 

CLAIR, MARK TAPPEN, PHILLIP 

WILLIAMS, SCOTT WILLSON, 

acting for themselves and others 

similarly situated 

 Plaintiffs 

v. 

CITY OF SOUTH LAKE TAHOE, 

 Defendant. 

))

))

))

))

))

))

))

))

))

))

))

))

))

)

 CASE NO. 2:05-cv-0918-MCE-GGH 

 STIPULATION RE APPROVAL OF 

 SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND 

 DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE 

 AND ORDER THEREON 

 

Case 2:05-cv-00918-MCE -GGH Document 39 Filed 06/21/06 Page 1 of 5
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 STIPULATION RE APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT Adler, et al. v. South Lake Tahoe

AGREEMENT AND DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE 2:05-CV-00918-MCE-GGH 

 

-2- 

 

 

STIPULATION

The Plaintiffs and Defendant in the above-captioned action hereby stipulate asfollows: 

1. Plaintiffs Josh Adler, et al. (collectively APlaintiffs@) are presently or were 

previously employed by the City of South Lake Tahoe (ADefendant@). In addition 

to the Plaintiffs individually-named on the caption, Gregory Evans and Johnny 

Poland have joined as Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs and the Defendant shall be collectively 

referred to as AParties@ herein. 

2. Plaintiffs filed the above captioned action (AAction@) arising out of certain events 

that allegedly occurred during their employment by the City ofSouthLake Tahoe. 

3. Plaintiffs= Complaint to the Action for violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act 

(AComplaint@), alleges violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (29 U.S.C. '

201 et seq.) (AFLSA@). The Complaint seeks recovery of allegedly unpaid 

overtime, liquidated damages, attorneys’ fees and costs. The Court has 

jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action and over the parties. 

4. The Defendant filed an Answer to the Complaint denying its material allegations 

and asserting affirmative defenses thereto. 

5. The Court has not certified the Action as a collective action nor has notice been 

sent to any potential class members providing them with the opportunity to either 

Aopt-in@ or Aopt-out@ of the Action. 

6. The Plaintiffs’ claims are in all respects controverted, and the Parties dispute 

whether FLSA cases are subject to class actions, the applicability of the FLSA to 

the facts as alleged in the Complaint, as well as the applicable level of 

compensation, and all other claims, allegations and requests for damages; and 

7. The Parties have engaged in extensive negotiations in an attempt to resolve their 

differences, and throughout these negotiations all Parties were, and continue to 

Case 2:05-cv-00918-MCE -GGH Document 39 Filed 06/21/06 Page 2 of 5
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 STIPULATION RE APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT Adler, et al. v. South Lake Tahoe

AGREEMENT AND DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE 2:05-CV-00918-MCE-GGH 

 

-3- 

be, represented by counsel experienced in wage and employment matters. 

8. The Parties wish to avoid the potential uncertainty, expense and delayoflitigation 

and have therefore, based upon their extensive negotiations, agreed to a 

settlement of the Parties= dispute. The terms of the Parties= agreement are 

embodied in the Settlement Agreement and General Release of All Claims 

(ASettlement Agreement@) which all Parties have executed. A copy of the 

Settlement Agreement is attached hereto and incorporated herein; 

9. Plaintiffs= potential recovery at trial, if any, remains unknown, but the Parties 

believe that the terms of the Settlement Agreement are consistent with and within 

the range of reasonable result that Plaintiffs might expect to obtain after a trial; 

10. Courts have determined that the provisions of the FLSA are mandatory and 

cannot generally be abridged by contract or otherwise waived. Lynn=s Food 

Stores, Inc. v. United States, 679 F.2d 1350, 1352 (11th Cir. 1982). However, 

when employees bring a private action for compensation under the FLSA, and 

present the district court a proposed settlement, the district court may enter a 

judgment after scrutinizing the settlement for fairness. Id. at 1353; 

11. The Parties present the Court with this Stipulation re Approval of Settlement 

Agreement and Dismissal with Prejudice and [Proposed] Order Thereon 

(AStipulation and Order@) through which they intend to finally resolve all claims 

asserted in this Action based upon the Settlement Agreement; 

12. By entering into this Stipulation and requesting Court approval, the Parties do not 

intend that the Court should make any findings or determination regarding the 

Defendant=s alleged violation of the FLSA, or any other federal or state law, 

regulation, order, or rule. This Stipulation and Order, and any exhibits and any 

other documents or written materials prepared in conjunction with this Stipulation 

and Order, should not constitute evidence of, or any admission of, anyviolation of 

Case 2:05-cv-00918-MCE -GGH Document 39 Filed 06/21/06 Page 3 of 5
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 STIPULATION RE APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT Adler, et al. v. South Lake Tahoe

AGREEMENT AND DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE 2:05-CV-00918-MCE-GGH 

 

-4- 

the FLSA, or any other federal or state law, regulation, order, or rule by any 

Party. 

13. The Parties jointly request the Court approve of and enter the Stipulation and 

Order; IT IS THEREFORE STIPULATED, by and between the Parties, through 

their respective counsel, that: 

1. The Settlement Agreement which is incorporated herein by reference, is 

fair, reasonable and just in all respects as to the Plaintiffs, and the Court 

should therefore approve the Settlement Agreement and enter this 

Stipulation and Order; 

2. The Court should expressly reserve jurisdiction with respect to this Action 

for the purposes of enforcing the Settlement Agreement; 

3. The award of and allocation of costs and attorneys fees should be as 

provided for in the Settlement Agreement; 

4. Upon the Court=s approval of the Settlement Agreement, this Action 

should be dismissed with prejudice. 

Dated: April __, 2006 MASTAGNI, HOLSTEDT, AMICK, 

 MILLER, JOHNSEN & UHRHAMMER 

 By: 

 DAVID E. MASTAGNI 

 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

Dated: April __, 2006 LIEBERT, CASSIDY, WHITMORE 

 By: ______________________________ 

 CYNTHIA O’NEILL

 Attorney for Defendant 

ORDER

Case 2:05-cv-00918-MCE -GGH Document 39 Filed 06/21/06 Page 4 of 5
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 STIPULATION RE APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT Adler, et al. v. South Lake Tahoe

AGREEMENT AND DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE 2:05-CV-00918-MCE-GGH 

 

-5- 

The Court has carefully reviewed the Settlement Agreement, and the proposed 

Stipulation and Order. Based upon a review of the record, and good cause appearing, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED as follows: 

1. The Settlement Agreement, which is incorporated herein by reference, is 

approved as fair, reasonable and just in all respects as to the Plaintiffs, and the 

Parties shall perform the Settlement Agreement in accordance with its terms; 

2. The Court expressly reserves jurisdiction with respect to this Action for the 

purposes of enforcing the Settlement Agreement; 

3. The award of and allocation of costs and attorneys fees shall be as provided for 

in the Settlement Agreement; 

4. The Court has made no findings or determination regarding the Defendant=s 

alleged violation of the FLSA, or any other federal or state law, regulation, order, 

or rule, and this Stipulation and Order and any exhibits and any of the other 

documents or written materials prepared in conjunction with this Stipulation and 

Order shall not constitute evidence of, or any admission of, any violation of the 

FLSA, or any other federal or state law, regulation, order, or rule; 

5. This Action is hereby dismissed with prejudice. 

 

 Dated: June 20, 2006 

__________________________________ 

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 2:05-cv-00918-MCE -GGH Document 39 Filed 06/21/06 Page 5 of 5