2 0 4741 30 3.1

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

Karen L. Karr (014501)

CLARK HILL PLC

14850 North Scottsdale Road, Suite 500

Scottsdale, Arizona 85254

Telephone: (480) 684-1100

Facsimile: (480) 684-1168

Email: kkarr@clarkhill.com

Attorneys for Defendant

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Eric Meadows, et ux,

Plaintiffs,

vs.

Second Chance Group Homes LLC, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:15-cv-02454-JJT

DEFENDANT’S UNOPPOSED

MOTION FOR APPROVAL

OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

Defendants respectfully seek an order of this Court approving settlement of

Plaintiffs’ claims for alleged violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act. Defendants have

been informed that Plaintiffs will not oppose this Motion.

As this Court has noted, it is no longer clear that settlement of litigated FLSA

claims by represented Plaintiff must be approved by the Court to be binding. See Smith v.

Tri-City Transmission Serv., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119428 (D. Ariz. 2012). However, in

the absence of binding authority to the contrary, the parties respectfully seek this Court’s

approval of the parties’ settlement of Plaintiff’s claims.

Pursuant to this Court’s July 8, 2016 Order (Doc. 23), the attached Settlement

Agreement is filed under seal.

Respectfully submitted this 11th day of July, 2016.

CLARK HILL PLC

By /s/ Karen L. Karr

Karen L. Karr

Attorneys for Defendant

Case 2:15-cv-02454-JJT Document 24 Filed 07/11/16 Page 1 of 4
2

2 0 4741 30 3.1

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

MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES

I. BACKGROUND AND CLAIMS

Defendant Second Chance Group Homes LLC (SCGH) operates group homes for

minors with developmental disabilities. Defendant properly tracked time worked and paid

Plaintiffs, who worked at the homes. Plaintiffs now allege that they worked time that is

not included on the time sheets. Defendant adamantly denies those allegations.

Despite Defendants’ denial of liability, they understand that it would be more costly

to litigate this case than to settle at this time. Therefore, to avoid the ongoing costs and

risks of litigation, Defendants agreed to pay certain sums to Plaintiffs. The parties

negotiated the terms of a Confidential Settlement Agreement, a copy of which is submitted

(under seal) with this Motion as an Exhibit.

II. THE PARTIES’ AGREEMENT IS FAIR AND EQUITABLE.

When parties seek approval of an FLSA settlement, a district court may approve the

settlement if it reflects a reasonable compromise over the issues to promote the policy of

encouraging settlement of litigation. Juvera v. Salcido, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 176716,

*23 (D. Ariz. 2013). While there are no agreed-upon factors to consider in evaluating a

proposed FLSA settlement, the following may be relevant in the instant case.

A. The Strength of Plaintiffs’ Case and the Employer’s Defense.

Plaintiffs’ initial disclosures reveal their belief that they are due substantial damages

for working 24-hour shifts. However, Defendants never asked or allowed employees

(including Plaintiffs), to work 24-hour shifts. Rather, each house was staffed around the

clock with employees working eight-hour shifts. Therefore, Plaintiffs’ allegations are

based on demonstrably erroneous assumptions.

Contrary to Plaintiffs’ allegations, Defendant SCGH’s records reveal that it kept

track of time and paid Plaintiffs for all hours they worked.

Case 2:15-cv-02454-JJT Document 24 Filed 07/11/16 Page 2 of 4
3

2 0 4741 30 3.1

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

B. Risk, Expense, Complexity and Likely Duration of Further Litigation.

The parties have not yet begun discovery. If a settlement is not approved, the parties

must engage in full-scale litigation – something neither party desires.

C. Amount Offered in Settlement.

The attached Settlement Agreement reveals that Defendants will pay to Plaintiffs an

amount sufficient to cover Plaintiffs’ agreed-upon back wages, an equal amount as

liquidated damages, and an amount for Plaintiffs’ attorneys’ fees. Defendant disputes that

Plaintiffs are entitled to the amount it agrees to pay, and that the attorneys’ fees are

reasonable. However, it does not wish to expend further sums to litigate those issues.

D. Potential Legal and Appeal Issues.

If this matter does not settle, Defendants will argue that the SCGH group homes are

exempt from the overtime requirements of the FLSA. As this is an unsettled issue, it will

necessarily entail an appeal, no matter which party prevails in the trial court.

E. Experience and Views of Counsel.

Both parties were represented during settlement discussions. Plaintiffs’ counsel and

Defendants’ counsel are both experienced in the litigation of FLSA claims. Plaintiffs’

counsel believes it is a fair and equitable recovery for his clients. Defendants’ counsel

believes that the amount is a fair compromise over disputed claims and an appropriate

amount to avoid the cost and risk of going to trial.

III. CONCLUSION AND RELIEF REQUESTED

The parties to the Settlement Agreement believe it represents a fair and reasonable

compromise of the complex and disputed issues in this case. The parties therefore

respectfully request that the Court review the parties’ proposed settlement, rule that the

terms of the agreement represent a fair and equitable resolution of this action, and dismiss

the claims of Plaintiffs with prejudice.

After conferring with Plaintiffs’ counsel, Defendants hereby report that this Motion

will be unopposed.

Case 2:15-cv-02454-JJT Document 24 Filed 07/11/16 Page 3 of 4
4

2 0 4741 30 3.1

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

DATED this 11th day of July, 2016.

CLARK HILL PLC

By /s/ Karen L. Karr

Karen L. Karr

Attorneys for Defendant

I hereby certify that on July 11, 2016, I electronically filed the foregoing document

to the Clerk's Office using the CM/ECF System for filing. Pursuant to Court order, the

attachment is filed under seal.

/s/ Deborah J. Lukas

Case 2:15-cv-02454-JJT Document 24 Filed 07/11/16 Page 4 of 4