McGough v. Elastic NV
- Robert Lehrburger
- 1:22-cv-09600
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In McGough v. Elasticsearch Inc., Judge Lehrburger approved the parties’ wage-settlement agreement and dismissed the case with prejudice.
Shaun McGough and the defendants—Elasticsearch Inc., Rachele Igoe, Erika Haraguchi, and Does 1-X—are affected by the approved settlement and dismissal with prejudice.
What happened
In McGough v. Elasticsearch Inc., Shaun McGough brought claims for damages under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law. The parties jointly asked the court to approve their settlement agreement.
The court reviewed the agreement and the parties’ letter, considering the risks and costs of continuing the case, possible recovery, the negotiation process, attorneys’ fees, and possible fraud or collusion. It found that the agreement was fair and reasonable, noting that it had no confidentiality or non-disparagement provisions, narrowly released wage-and-hour claims, and included fees within a fair and reasonable range.
Judge Robert W. Lehrburger approved the settlement. Because the case was resolved by settlement, the court dismissed and discontinued it in its entirety, with prejudice, without costs or fees to any party except as provided in the settlement agreement, and directed the clerk to terminate motions and deadlines and close the case.
The detailed version
- McGough v. Elastic NV · No. 1:22-cv-09600
- Robert Lehrburger
- Dec. 16, 2024
Background
Shaun McGough brought an action for damages under the Fair Labor Standards Act, a federal wage-and-hour law, and the New York Labor Law against Elasticsearch Inc., Rachele Igoe, Erika Haraguchi, and Does 1-X. The parties submitted a joint letter asking the court to approve their fully executed settlement agreement.
Settlement Review
Under the governing Second Circuit standard, a federal court must review an FLSA settlement to determine whether it is fair and reasonable and resulted from arm’s-length negotiation rather than employer overreaching. The court reviewed the settlement agreement and the parties’ letter. It considered, among other things, prior proceedings, the risks and costs of continuing the action, the possible range of recovery, whether the agreement resulted from arm’s-length bargaining between experienced counsel or the parties, attorneys’ fees, and the possibility of fraud or collusion.
The court noted that the agreement contained no confidentiality restrictions or non-disparagement provisions. It also found that the release was narrowly tailored to wage-and-hour claims and that the attorneys’ fees were within a fair, reasonable, and acceptable range. The court found the settlement fair and reasonable and approved it.
Disposition
The court stated that the case had been resolved by settlement and dismissed and discontinued it in its entirety, with prejudice, without costs or fees to any party except as provided in the settlement agreement. The court also requested that the clerk terminate all motions and deadlines and close the case. Judge Robert W. Lehrburger signed the order on December 16, 2024.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.