ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. This matter is before the Professional Standards and Practices Commission (“Commission”) on the Department of Education’s (“Department”) Motion for Entry of Order filed on December 17, 2020. The Motion requests that the Commission issue an order approving the parties’ Settlement Agreement and directing the Department to issue a public reprimand to Xxxx Xxxxx (“Respondent’) in settlement of an educator misconduct complaint filed against him.
ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. THIS MATTER came before the Court following a settlement conference before the undersigned and the Court having conducted a hearing concerning the settlement. THE COURT has heard from counsel and considered the terms of the Settlement Agreement, the pertinent portions of the record, and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. This case involves a claim for unpaid overtime compensation under the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. §201, et seq ("FLSA"). In reviewing a settlement of an FLSA private claim, a court must "scrutiniz[e] the settlement for fairness," and determine that the settlement is a "fair and reasonable resolution of a bona fide dispute over FLSA provisions." Lynn Food Stores v. United States, 679 F.2d 1350, 1352-53 (11th Cir. 1982). A settlement entered into in an adversarial context where both sides are represented by counsel throughout litigation "is more likely to reflect a reasonable compromise of disputed issues." Id. The district court may approve the settlement in order to promote the policy of encouraging settlement of litigation. Id. at 1354. Xxxxxxx.Xxxxxx.xxx In this case, there is a bona fide dispute over FLSA provisions, as evidenced by the claims alleged and defenses alleged in the pleadings. The Court has reviewed the terms of the Settlement Agreement including the amount to be received by the plaintiff and the attorney’s fees and costs to be received by counsel and finds that the compromise reached by the parties is a fair and reasonable resolution of the parties' bona fide disputes. Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the parties' Settlement Agreement (including attorney’s fees and costs) is hereby APPROVED. DONE AND ORDERED in Xxxxxxxx at Miami, Florida this 2nd day of March, 2009. XXXX X. X’XXXXXXXX UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Copies provided to: United States District Judge Xxxxx All counsel of record
ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. This matter is before the Professional Standards and Practices Commission (“Commission”) on the Department of Education’s (“Department”) Motion for Entry of Order requesting that the Commission issue an order approving the parties’ Settlement Agreement and directing the Department to issue a public reprimand to Xxxxxxx Xxxxxxx (“Respondent’) in settlement of an educator misconduct complaint filed against him.
ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. This matter is before the Professional Standards and Practices Commission (“Commission”) on the Department of Education’s (“Department”) Motion for Entry of Order filed on January 24, 2020. The Motion requests that the Commission issue an order approving the parties’ Settlement Agreement and directing the Department to suspend the certificate and employment eligibility of Xxxxxxx X. Xxxxxx (“Respondent”) in settlement of an educator misconduct complaint filed against her. Respondent holds an Instructional I certificate in the area of Mathematics 7-12. At all relevant times, Respondent was employed by New Directions as a secondary math teacher. On or about June 17, 2016, an educator misconduct complaint was filed with the Department alleging that Respondent engaged in inappropriate communication and conduct with students. As required by the Educator Discipline Act (“Act”), the Department provided written notice to Respondent of the legal sufficiency of the complaint and of its determination that there was probable cause to believe that grounds for discipline existed. 24 P.S. § 2070.9(e).
ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. On November 22, 2021, Presque Isle Electric & Gas Co-op (Presque Isle) filed an application pursuant to Act 69 of 1929, as amended, MCL 460.501 et seq., requesting a certificate of public convenience and necessity (CPCN) to construct a natural gas service line and to render natural gas service in Xxxxxx Township, Alpena County, Michigan. A prehearing conference was held on April 21, 2022, before Administrative Law Judge Xxxxxxxxxxx X. Xxxxxxxx. Presque Isle and the Commission Staff participated in the proceeding. Subsequently, the parties submitted a settlement agreement resolving all issues in the case. The Commission has reviewed the settlement agreement and finds that the public interest is adequately represented by the parties who entered into the settlement agreement. The Commission further finds that the settlement agreement is in the public interest, represents a fair and reasonable resolution of the proceeding, and should be approved. The Commission notes that the settlement agreement also addresses compliance with the Michigan Environmental Protection Act, Part 17 of the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act, as amended, MCL 324.101 et seq. (MEPA). While the applicability of MEPA to Act 69 cases is not clear based on existing case law, to the extent MEPA does apply to the present case, the Commission finds that the settlement agreement complies with the provisions of MEPA as any environmental impairment caused by the proposed natural gas main is de minimis and approval of the settlement agreement is consistent with the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare in light of the state’s paramount concern for the protection of its natural resources from pollution, impairment, or destruction. THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that:
ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. THIS MATTER was set for a settlement conference on Tuesday, July 22, 2008 before the undersigned. At the commencement of the settlement conference, the parties notified the undersigned that a settlement had been reached. THE COURT has heard from counsel and considered the terms of the Settlement Agreement, the pertinent portions of the record, and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. This case involves a claim for unpaid overtime compensation under the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. §201, et seq ("FLSA") and specifically under the provisions of 29 U.S.C. §§ 207(a)(1) and 216(b). In reviewing a settlement of an FLSA private claim, a court must "scrutiniz[e] the settlement for fairness," and determine that the settlement is a "fair and reasonable resolution of a bona fide dispute over FLSA provisions." Xxxx Food Stores v. United States, 679 F.2d 1350, 1352-53 (11th Cir. 1982). A settlement entered into in an adversarial context where both sides are represented by counsel throughout litigation "is more likely to reflect a reasonable compromise of disputed issues." Id. The district court may approve the settlement in order to promote the policy of encouraging settlement of litigation. Id. at 1354. In this case, there is a bona fide dispute over FLSA provisions, as evidenced by the claims alleged in the complaint. The Court finds that the compromise reached by the parties under the terms of the Settlement Agreement is a fair and reasonable resolution of the parties' bona fide disputes. Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the parties' Settlement Agreement is hereby APPROVED. It is further ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that on or before August 5, 2008, the parties shall file a stipulation and proposed order of dismissal. The failure to comply with this order may result in a dismissal with prejudice. DONE AND ORDERED, in Chambers, at Miami, Florida this 22nd day of July, 2008. Copies furnished to: U.S. District Judge Xxxxx All counsel of record XXXX X. X’XXXXXXXX
ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. The Parties agree that this Agreement is contingent upon the Court's entry of a judgment approving the Agreement, which shall be referred to herein as the “Judgment” in the form of Exhibit A attached hereto. If the Court conditions its approval of the Settlement Agreement on any new or different terms or does not certify a non-opt out class, the parties shall and do each have the right to reject such terms. In such case, this Agreement shall terminate and (1) any evidence of the Parties participation in this Agreement shall not be admissible for any purpose in any aspect of the Actions, and (2) the certification of this Settlement Class shall be deemed void, and the Settlement Class deemed de-certified.
ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. This Agreement is contingent upon entry of a final, non-appealable order of the Bankruptcy Court approving this Agreement (“Order”). The Parties will in good faith exercise all reasonable efforts required to obtain the entry of the Order, including executing and delivering any motions, declarations or other items of support reasonably required in connection therewith. Consistent with the preceding sentence, the Plaintiff will promptly prepare a motion to approve compromise of controversy pursuant to Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 9019 (“Motion”). The Plaintiff shall file the Motion with the Bankruptcy Court and serve the Motion upon those parties entitled to notice thereof.
ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. This matter is before the Professional Standards and Practices Commission (“Commission”) on the Department of Education’s (“Department”) Motion for Entry of Order filed on April 6, 2022. The Motion requests that the Commission issue an order approving the parties’ Settlement Agreement and directing the Department to issue a public supplemental sanction to Xxxxxxxxxx Xxxxxxxx (“Respondent”) in settlement of an educator misconduct complaint filed against her. BACKGROUND Respondent holds an Instructional II certificate in the areas of English 7-12 and Library Science PK-12. At all relevant times, Respondent was employed by the Crestwood School District as a teacher. On June 29, 2016, an educator misconduct complaint was filed with the Department alleging that Respondent had inappropriate conversations with a student, none of which were sexual or romantic in nature.
ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. This matter is before the Professional Standards and Practices Commission (“Commission”) on the Department of Education’s (“Department”) Motion for Entry of Order filed on December 21, 2020. The Motion requests that the Commission issue an order approving the parties’ Settlement Agreement and directing the Department to suspend the certificate and employment eligibility of Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx (“Respondent’) in settlement of a Notice of Charges filed against her. BACKGROUND Respondent holds an Instructional II certificate in the area of English 7-12. At all relevant times, Respondent was employed by the Xxxxxxx Community Charter School. On November 1, 2013, the Department filed a Notice of Charges alleging that Respondent engaged in conduct that compromised the integrity of the PSSA testing results and charging her with immorality, negligence, and intemperance. Respondent timely filed a response and request for hearing on November 25, 2013. The charges against Respondent were consolidated with the charges docketed at DI-13-109, DI-13- 110, DI-13-111, and DI-13-112 for purposes of hearing before a single hearing officer. Twelve days of hearings were held beginning in October 2015 and continuing through June 2016. On April 24, 2017, the hearing officer issued a proposed report, in which she found Respondent guilty of immorality, negligence, and intemperance and recommended the revocation of Respondent’s certificate and employment eligibility.
