Laura Canaday, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. The Anthem Companies, Inc.

CourtDistrict Court, W.D. Tennessee
DecidedJanuary 26, 2026
Docket1:19-cv-01084
StatusUnknown

This text of Laura Canaday, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. The Anthem Companies, Inc. (Laura Canaday, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. The Anthem Companies, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Tennessee primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Laura Canaday, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. The Anthem Companies, Inc., (W.D. Tenn. 2026).

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE EASTERN DIVISION ______________________________________________________________________________

LAURA CANADAY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,

Plaintiff,

v. No. 1:19-cv-01084-STA-jay

THE ANTHEM COMPANIES, INC.,

Defendant. ______________________________________________________________________________

ORDER ON JOINT NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT ______________________________________________________________________________

On January 26, 2026, the parties filed a Joint Notice of Settlement (ECF No. 170), reporting that they had reached an out-of-court agreement to resolve their dispute. Local Rule 83.13(b) requires the parties to any civil action to promptly notify the presiding judge if they reach a settlement. The Rule then gives the parties 28 days to file a final stipulation or motion for dismissal. The Court finds that the parties have satisfied the notice of settlement required by Local Rule 83.13(b). The Court hereby continues the non-jury trial set for February 23, 2026, and the pretrial conference set for February 13, 2026. Instead of the 28 days granted under the Local Rules for filing a motion or stipulation of dismissal, the parties have requested 45 days to file a motion for approval of their settlement. In Fair Labor Standards Acts cases, the parties must take the additional step of seeking court approval of any settlement agreement. A district court must scrutinize a proposed FLSA settlement for fairness and determine whether it is a “fair and reasonable resolution of a bona fide dispute over FLSA provisions.” Lynn’s Food Stores, Inc. v. United States ex rel. U.S. Dep’t of Labor, 679 F.2d 1350, 1355 (11th Cir. 1982); Steele v. Staffmark Invs., LLC, 172 F. Supp. 3d 1024, 1026 (W.D. Tenn. 2016) (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”). In this analysis, the Court examines three factors: (1) whether the settlement was achieved in an adversarial context, (2) whether the plaintiffs were represented by attorneys

who can protect their rights and (3) whether the settlement reflects a fair and reasonable compromise of the issues in dispute. Lynn’s Food Stores, 679 F.2d at 1354. The parties’ request to have 45 days in which to file a joint motion for approval of their FLSA settlement is GRANTED. The parties’ joint motion is therefore due on or before March 12, 2026. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/ S. Thomas Anderson S. THOMAS ANDERSON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Date: January 26, 2026

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Laura Canaday, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. The Anthem Companies, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/laura-canaday-individually-and-on-behalf-of-all-others-similarly-situated-tnwd-2026.