No specific laws identified for this ruling.
The court approved the parties' joint stipulation for dismissal with prejudice based on a settlement agreement under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The plaintiffs received 100% of calculated damages for failure to include bonuses in regular rate calculations plus an equal amount in liquidated damages.
Friedly v. Union Bank and Trust Company — Settlement Summary
What Happened
Employees at Union Bank and Trust Company filed a lawsuit claiming the bank improperly calculated their pay. Specifically, the workers said the bank failed to include bonuses when determining their regular hourly rate, which affected overtime pay calculations.
Court Decision
The court approved a settlement agreement between the workers and the bank. Under this agreement, the employees received 100% of the money the bank owed them for unpaid wages, plus an equal additional amount in penalties. The case was dismissed, meaning no further legal action will proceed.
Why This Matters
This case reinforces that employers must include all types of compensation—including bonuses—when calculating what workers should earn, especially for overtime pay. Workers who believe they've been underpaid due to incorrect wage calculations have legal protections under federal law. If an employer makes such mistakes, employees can recover not just the missing wages, but also penalty damages. This settlement shows that courts take wage-calculation violations seriously.
This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.
Other orders and opinions in Friedly from the same court.
Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 3 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.
This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.