Combs v. Roark

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding that “any ostensible privacy right that would be invaded by publishing the settlement agreement pales in comparison to . . . the purpose of the FLSA”
• suggesting that the Sixth Circuit's holding in Runyan v. Nat’l Cash Register Corp., 787 F.2d 1039, 1042–43 (6th Cir. 1986) makes it likely that the Court would require approval of FLSA settlements
• noting the circuit split over “whether settlements or stipulations of dismissal for FLSA claims require court approval” and the fact that the “Sixth Circuit has yet to rule definitively on the question”
• noting the circuit split over “whether settlements or stipulations of dismissal for FLSA claims require court approval” and the fact that the “Sixth Circuit has yet to rule definitively on the question”
• noting the circuit split over “whether settlements or stipulations of dismissal for FLSA claims require court approval” and the fact that the “Sixth Circuit has yet to rule definitively on the question”
• “[T]his Court is unwilling to approve a settlement or dismissal of FLSA claims where the terms of the settlement are not available to the public.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).