Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01966/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01966-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Edwin Arlt
Plaintiff
Paul M. Beckham
Plaintiff
Joe Blair
Plaintiff
City of Galt
Defendant
Doreen Coberly
Plaintiff
Mark Edward Crews
Plaintiff
Charles A. Dedricksen
Plaintiff
Steve Denier
Plaintiff
Andrew E. Duncan
Plaintiff
Justin B. Elliott
Plaintiff
Katie Joanne Gilstrap
Plaintiff
Sabrina Lambson
Plaintiff
Sylvia McIntyre
Plaintiff
Peggy L. Mitchell
Plaintiff
Bruce E. Ramos
Plaintiff
Elaine S. Roberts
Plaintiff
Chris Sanford
Plaintiff
Christopher John Smith
Plaintiff
Gerald L. Stoffel
Plaintiff
Michael Anthony Tassano
Plaintiff
Mary-Frances E. Tassano
Plaintiff
Robert L. Whittington
Plaintiff
Brian Winsor
Plaintiff

Document Text:

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 Arlt et al. v. City of Galt

AGREEMENT AND DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE 2:05-CV-1966-FCD-DAD

AND ORDER THEREON 

DAVID P. MASTAGNI, ESQ. (SBN 57721)

DAVID E. MASTAGNI, ESQ. (SBN 204244)

WILL M. YAMADA, ESQ. (SBN 226669)

STESHA R. HODGES, ESQ (SBN 234892)

MASTAGNI, HOLSTEDT, AMICK, 

MILLER, JOHNSEN & UHRHAMMER 

A Professional Corporation

1912 “I” 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

EDWIN ARLT, PAUL M. BECKHAM,

JOE BLAIR, DOREEN COBERLY,

MARK EDWARD CREWS, CHARLES A.

DEDRICKSEN, STEVE DENIER,

ANDREW E. DUNCAN, JUSTIN B.

ELLIOTT, KATIE JOANNE GILSTRAP,

SABRINA LAMBSON, SYLVIA

McINTYRE, PEGGY L. MITCHELL,

BRUCE E. RAMOS, ELAINE S.

ROBERTS, CHRIS SANFORD,

CHRISTOPHER JOHN SMITH, GERALD

L. STOFFEL, MARY-FRANCES E.

TASSANO, MICHAEL ANTHONY

TASSANO, ROBERT L. WHITTINGTON,

BRIAN WINSOR acting for themselves

and others similarly situated,

Plaintiffs,

v.

CITY OF GALT,

Defendant.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO. 2:05-CV-1966-FCD-DAD

STIPULATION RE APPROVAL OF

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND

DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE AND

ORDER THEREON

STIPULATION

The parties to the above captioned action hereby stipulate as follows:

1. Plaintiffs Edwin Arlt, et al. (collectively “Plaintiffs”) are presently or were

previously employed by the City of Galt (“Defendant”). Plaintiffs and the Defendant shall

Case 2:05-cv-01966-FCD-DAD Document 11 Filed 04/20/06 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 Arlt et al. v. City of Galt

AGREEMENT AND DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE 2:05-CV-1966-FCD-DAD

AND ORDER THEREON -2-

be collectively referred to as “Parties” herein.

2. Plaintiffs filed the above captioned action (“Action”) on behalf of themselves

and others similarly situated arising out of certain events that allegedly occurred during their

employment by the City of Galt.

3. Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint to the action for violation of the Fair

Labor Standards Act (“Complaint”), alleges violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (29

U.S.C. § 201 et seq.) (“FLSA”). 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 First Amended 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 “optin” or “opt-out” of the Action.

6. The Parties dispute the applicability of the FLSA to the facts as alleged in the

Complaint.

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 be,

represented by counsel experienced in wage and employment matters.

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

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

which all the Parties, upon consultation with counsel, believe provides for a fair, reasonable

and just resolution of the Parties’ dispute. The terms of the Parties’ agreement are embodied

in the Settlement Agreement and General Release of All Claims (“Settlement 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

Case 2:05-cv-01966-FCD-DAD Document 11 Filed 04/20/06 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 Arlt et al. v. City of Galt

AGREEMENT AND DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE 2:05-CV-1966-FCD-DAD

AND ORDER THEREON -3-

of any 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 to this action intend to present the Court with this Stipulation re

Approval of Settlement Agreement and Dismissal with Prejudice and Order Thereon

(“Stipulation 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, any violation of the FLSA, or any other federal

or state law, regulation, order, or rule by any Party.

13. The Parties jointly request the Court find the settlement is fair, reasonable and

just and therefore 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

Case 2:05-cv-01966-FCD-DAD Document 11 Filed 04/20/06 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 Arlt et al. v. City of Galt

AGREEMENT AND DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE 2:05-CV-1966-FCD-DAD

AND ORDER THEREON -4-

for in the Settlement Agreement;

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

be dismissed with prejudice.

Dated: April 13, 2006 MASTAGNI, HOLSTEDT, AMICK,

MILLER, JOHNSEN & UHRHAMMER

By: 

WILL M. YAMADA

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

Dated: April __, 2006 BEST, BEST & KRIEGER

By: 

HOWARD GOLDS 

Attorney for Defendant

ORDER

TheCourt has carefully reviewed the Settlement Agreement,the proposedStipulation

and Order, and relevant Exhibits. 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;

Case 2:05-cv-01966-FCD-DAD Document 11 Filed 04/20/06 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 Arlt et al. v. City of Galt

AGREEMENT AND DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE 2:05-CV-1966-FCD-DAD

AND ORDER THEREON -5-

5. This Action is hereby dismissed with prejudice.

Dated: April 19, 2006 /s/ Frank C. Damrell Jr. 

HONORABLE FRANK C. DAMRELL JR.

Case 2:05-cv-01966-FCD-DAD Document 11 Filed 04/20/06 Page 5 of 5