Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Dec. 20, 2024

Saffer v. Convalt Energy, Inc.

Judge
Barbara Moses
Docket
1:24-cv-01850
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
FlsaCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Saffer v. Convalt Energy, Inc., Judge Moses approved the parties’ wage settlement and dismissed the action with prejudice.

Who this affects

Robert Saffer and the defendants, including Convalt Energy, Inc., are affected. The defendants must pay $30,000 under the approved Fair Labor Standards Act settlement; Saffer will receive $24,000 and his counsel will receive $6,000. The action was dismissed with prejudice.

What happened

In Saffer v. Convalt Energy, Inc., the parties jointly asked the court to approve their settlement of Robert Saffer’s Fair Labor Standards Act wage claims. They also settled his New York Labor Law and breach-of-contract claims through a separate confidential agreement that did not require court approval.

The approved wage agreement requires the defendants to pay $30,000 within 60 days. Saffer will receive $24,000, and his lawyers will receive $6,000 for fees and expenses. The court found the settlement fair and reasonable because of the disputed facts and defenses, the parties’ negotiations with experienced lawyers, and the absence of confidentiality restrictions on discussing the wage claim.

Judge Moses granted the parties’ letter-motions at Docket entries 57 and 59, approved the Fair Labor Standards Act agreement, dismissed the action with prejudice, and directed the Clerk of Court to close the case.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Saffer v. Convalt Energy, Inc. · No. 1:24-cv-01850
Judge
Barbara Moses
Date
Dec. 20, 2024

Background

The parties jointly sought approval of a fully executed settlement agreement resolving Robert Saffer’s claim under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Saffer alleged that the defendants failed to pay minimum and overtime wages during his employment from September 22, 2022, through July 2, 2023. He also alleged that he had been employed as Convalt Energy, Inc.’s Chief Revenue Officer and had been promised an annual salary of $200,000.

The defendants asserted that Saffer was exempt from the Fair Labor Standards Act’s protections and that he had been paid through warrants in Convalt. The defendants also asserted counterclaims. Saffer separately brought claims under the New York Labor Law and common law for breach of contract. The parties settled those claims through a separate confidential agreement, which they filed to assist the court in reviewing the wage settlement.

Settlement Terms and Court’s Analysis

For settlement purposes, Saffer estimated his potential Fair Labor Standards Act damages at approximately $23,505, including liquidated damages but excluding prejudgment interest and attorneys’ fees. The wage settlement requires the defendants to pay $30,000 in a lump sum within 60 days. Saffer will receive $24,000, and his counsel will receive $6,000 for fees and expense reimbursement.

The court found the financial and nonfinancial terms fair and reasonable. It relied on the defenses that made Saffer’s ultimate recovery uncertain, the fact that the parties engaged in motion practice and written discovery, and the arms-length negotiations conducted during a judicially supervised settlement conference. The court also found the attorneys’ fee allocation reasonable because it was 20% of the wage settlement, below the percentage allowed by Saffer’s contingency agreement, below counsel’s lodestar, and not excessive.

The court noted that the wage settlement did not restrict Saffer’s ability to discuss his Fair Labor Standards Act claim. Although the separate confidential agreement contained confidentiality provisions, Saffer retained the right to make truthful statements about his wage claim and its settlement.

Disposition

Judge Barbara Moses granted the parties’ letter-motions at Docket entries 57 and 59. She approved the Fair Labor Standards Act agreement as fair and reasonable, dismissed the action with prejudice, and directed the Clerk of Court to close the case.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.