Peralta v. CB Hospitality and Events, LLC

Background

The parties advised the court that they had reached a settlement in the case, which includes claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), a federal law governing certain employee pay and working conditions. The order does not describe the settlement’s terms or state that the court approved it.

Court’s Instructions

The court described three ways the parties could proceed:

1. Dismissal with prejudice after court approval. The parties may seek approval under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2) to dismiss the FLSA claims with prejudice, meaning the claims would be ended and could not be brought again. Under the Second Circuit’s decision in Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc., the parties cannot use Rule 41(a)(1)(A) to dismiss FLSA claims with prejudice without court approval. The parties first had to discuss whether they would consent to having all further proceedings handled by the assigned magistrate judge. If they did not both consent, they had to notify the court by July 15, 2024, without identifying the party or parties that withheld consent. They then had to submit a joint motion by July 22, 2024, explaining why the settlement was fair, addressing the factors identified in Wolinsky v. Scholastic Inc., and attaching the settlement agreement. The court stated that it would not approve agreements containing confidentiality provisions and would not allow settlement-related materials to be filed under seal without a specific showing overcoming the presumption of public access. If the settlement included attorney’s fees, the parties also had to address whether the fees were reasonable and attach detailed attorney time records.

2. Dismissal without prejudice if there was no FLSA settlement. The parties could submit a stipulation under Rule 41(a)(1)(A) dismissing the FLSA claims without prejudice, meaning the claims would not be permanently barred from being brought again. To use this route, the parties had to certify that there had been no settlement of the FLSA claims and submit the stipulation and certification by July 15, 2024. If they could not make that certification, they had to seek court review of the settlement under the first procedure.

3. Offer of judgment. The parties could resolve the case through an offer and acceptance of judgment under Rule 68(a). The court explained that, under the Second Circuit’s decision in Met Xing Yu v. Hasaki Restaurant, Inc., court approval is not required for a Rule 68(a) offer of judgment in a case involving FLSA claims. Any executed offer and acceptance, along with a proposed order entering judgment consistent with those terms, had to be submitted by July 15, 2024.

Disposition

The order provided instructions for completing the settlement process and did not itself dismiss the claims, approve the settlement, or enter judgment. It was a procedural order addressing the possible dismissal or resolution of the FLSA claims.