Quay v. Monarch Healthcare Management LLC
- John Tunheim
- 0:21-cv-01796
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
In Quay v. Monarch Healthcare Management LLC, Judge Tunheim approved a joint settlement agreement resolving federal wage-and-hour claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act and dismissed the case with prejudice.
Employees (named plaintiff April Quay and opt-in plaintiffs) who brought wage-and-hour claims against Monarch Healthcare Management LLC under the Fair Labor Standards Act, and their attorneys at Anderson Alexander, PLLC and Nichols Kaster PLLP.
What happened
In Quay v. Monarch Healthcare Management LLC, plaintiff April Quay and her fellow opt-in plaintiffs brought claims against Monarch Healthcare Management LLC under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), the federal law that sets minimum wage and overtime requirements. The parties jointly asked the court to approve a settlement they had reached, which is required under the FLSA to ensure workers are not pressured into giving up valid wage claims for less than they are worth.
The court reviewed the proposed Settlement Agreement and Release of Claims and found that it represented a fair and reasonable resolution of a genuine dispute over FLSA provisions, applying the standard set out in the leading case on FLSA settlement approvals. The court also approved attorneys' fees and costs for the plaintiffs' legal team as set out in the agreement.
Judge Tunheim granted the joint motion, approved the settlement agreement, appointed April Quay as representative for all opt-in plaintiffs, approved the plaintiffs' attorneys from Anderson Alexander, PLLC and Nichols Kaster PLLP as collective counsel, and dismissed the case with prejudice — meaning the case is fully closed and cannot be refiled.
The detailed version
This case, April Quay v. Monarch Healthcare Management LLC, Civil No. 21-1796, was before United States District Judge John R. Tunheim in the District of Minnesota. Plaintiff April Quay filed suit under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), the federal statute governing minimum wage, overtime pay, and related worker protections. The case was brought as a collective action, meaning other similarly situated employees (referred to as 'opt-in plaintiffs') joined the lawsuit.
On September 5, 2025, both parties filed a Joint Motion for Approval of FLSA Settlement (Docket No. 142), along with a proposed Settlement Agreement and Release of Claims (Docket No. 143-2). Court approval of FLSA settlements is required as a matter of law to ensure that employees are not waiving legitimate wage claims without adequate compensation. The standard applied by the court — drawn from Lynn's Food Stores, Inc. v. United States, 679 F.2d 1350, 1355 (11th Cir. 1982), and followed in this district — requires that the settlement be a 'fair and reasonable resolution of a bona fide dispute over FLSA provisions.'
Judge Tunheim issued the order on March 9, 2026, granting the joint motion and approving the settlement agreement in full, including attorneys' fees and costs to collective counsel. The order: (1) appointed named plaintiff April Quay as representative for the opt-in plaintiffs; (2) approved Clif Alexander and Austin W. Anderson of Anderson Alexander, PLLC, and Michele R. Fisher of Nichols Kaster PLLP as collective counsel; (3) authorized counsel to use reasonable procedures to administer the settlement; and (4) dismissed the case with prejudice — a final dismissal barring any future refiling — without additional attorneys' fees or costs beyond those expressly provided in the settlement agreement. Judgment was ordered to be entered accordingly.
Reviewer note from the AI+
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.