Is judicial approval of an overtime settlement required?<\/p>\n
Traditionally, courts subscribed to the idea that judicial approval was necessary for any FLSA settlement.\u00a0 <\/span>Prior to 1945, the majority of court decisions had determined that employers and employees could not reach private settlements as to unpaid wages or overtime compensation so as to waive the liquidated damages claim under the Act. See, e.g., Fleming v. Post<\/i>, 146 F.2d 441 (2d Cir.1944); Seneca Coal & Coke Co. v. Lofton<\/i>, 136 F.2d 359 (10th Cir.1943). The ability to settle claims in cases involving bona fide disputes was less certain, however. See Atlantic Co. v. Broughton<\/i>, 146 F.2d 480 (5th Cir.1944) (“If … the payments in settlement were made under such circumstances as would create an agreement of accord and satisfaction, the claim for liquidated damages upon the amounts given in settlement was extinguished. If not, such claims continue to be valid obligations enforceable….\u201d). However, since then the law has evolved, such that courts are split on the issue of whether judicial approval of an FLSA settlement is required or not. Four federal appellate courts have weighed in on the issue, with mixed results:\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Federal district court decisions in circuits that have not spoken on this issue are likewise a mixed bag, however the trend is toward not requiring court approval of FLSA settlements.\u00a0 <\/span>In Ruiz v. Act Fast Delivery of Colorado, Inc.<\/i>, the District of Colorado held after a thorough discussion that “absent special circumstances, FLSA settlements do not require court approval.” No. 14-cv-00870-MSK-NYW, ECF No. 132 (D. Colo. Jan. 9, 2017), (unpublished); see also Serna v. Bd. of Cty. Comm’rs of Rio Arriba Cty, <\/i>No. 17cv196-RB-KBM, 2018 WL 4773361 (D.N.M. Oct. 3, 2018) (absent special circumstances, FLSA settlements do not require court approval); Lawson v. Procare CRS, Inc.<\/i>, No. 18-CV-00248-TCK-JFJ, 2019 WL 112781 (N.D. Okla. Jan. 4, 2019) (noting that the majority of districts have held that court approval is not necessary).<\/p>\n A district court in New Mexico was recently asked to approve a FLSA settlement.\u00a0 <\/span>Reviewing this caselaw, Judge Johnson discussed the legal landscape on this issue and determined that, at least in the 10th Circuit, judicial approval of an FLSA settlement was not necessary.\u00a0 <\/span>Hawthorn v. Fieesta Flooring, LLC<\/i>, No. 1:19-CV-00019 WJ\/SCY (D.N.M., June 10, 2020).\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n In this author\u2019s opinion, the Hawthorn decision is correct.\u00a0 <\/span>The notion that a plaintiff represented by counsel would still need a court\u2019s blessing in order to settle an FLSA claim is an outdated and unreasonable one.\u00a0 <\/span>The plaintiff\u2019s counsel is in the best position to evaluate whether a settlement of an FLSA claim is fair and reasonable. \u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n\n