Quantcast

PENNSYLVANIA RECORD

Wednesday, April 24, 2024

Federal judge signs off on $1.1M class action settlement over unpaid overtime; $386K going to lawyers

Federal Court
Usdcpittsburgh

PITTSBURGH — A federal judge has signed off on an amended $1.1 million settlement agreement in a labor law class action lawsuit.

Chad Kapolka and Brett Turrentine had sued Anchor Drilling Fluids USA and Q’Max America, alleging violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act with respect to overtime wages. In a Sept. 3 order, U.S. District Judge Nicholas Ranjan, of the Western District of Pennsylvania, raised concerns about the parties’ proposed settlement agreement. 

After a jointly submitted amended agreement, Ranjan issued an Oct. 22 opinion moving the deal forward.

Ranjan said he was inclined to reject the initial agreement on account of its confidentiality provision, a flaw addressed in the amended version. The underlying dispute is the plaintiffs’ allegation that the companies misclassified putative class members as independent contractors, depriving them of overtime pay. 

The companies “disagreed vehemently with many of the assertions in the complaint,” Ranjan wrote, citing an affidavit from the lawyers’ attorneys.

Under the deal, the defendant companies will pay $1.105 million, of which $386,750 will go to the plaintiffs’ lawyers in fees, along with up to $20,000 in court costs and other expenses and up to $7,000 for settlement administrative costs. Kapolka and Turrentine will each get $5,000 service awards. The remaining $694,522 will be prorated among opt-in class members based on the number of weeks of overtime pay in dispute.

“This case is not all that complex when compared to other class or collective actions, but neither is it uniquely straightforward,” Ranjan wrote, adding “settlement of this case would conserve substantial time, expense and judicial resources.”

Ranjan said all parties faced significant risks had the matter proceeded to trial, which factored into settlement negotiations, and further determined it was appropriate to set aside 35 percent of the settlement pool given the nature of the litigation and the experience of the plaintiffs’ counsel.

More News