Prudente v. Prohealth Connect, LLC
- Vernon Broderick
- 1:24-cv-07398
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Prudente v. Prohealth Connect, Judge Broderick required settlement details and fairness explanations before reviewing the FLSA settlement.
Yuly Prudente and the defendants in the FLSA case must submit the settlement terms and a joint fairness explanation within 30 days; if the agreement includes attorney’s fees, they must also submit supporting billing records.
What happened
Yuly Prudente and the defendants told the court they had reached a settlement in this Fair Labor Standards Act case. The court explained that these claims generally cannot be privately settled without approval from the court or the Department of Labor.
The court said it must decide whether the settlement is fair and reasonable by considering factors such as the possible recovery, litigation risks and costs, the bargaining process, and possible fraud or collusion. It also said attorney’s fees must be evaluated separately if the settlement includes them.
Judge Vernon S. Broderick ordered the parties to submit the settlement terms and a joint explanation within 30 days. The order did not approve or reject the settlement; it required more information so the court could evaluate it.
The detailed version
- Prudente v. Prohealth Connect, LLC · No. 1:24-cv-07398
- Vernon Broderick
- Dec. 26, 2024
Background
The court was advised that Yuly Prudente and the defendants had reached a settlement in an action under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), the federal law governing certain wage and hour rights. The order does not provide the settlement’s terms or describe the underlying disputed claims in detail.
Legal standard
The court explained that the parties could not privately settle the FLSA claims without approval from the district court or the Department of Labor. To decide whether the settlement is fair and reasonable, the court must consider the totality of the circumstances, including:
- Prudente’s possible recovery;
- Whether the settlement would help the parties avoid the expected burdens and expenses of proving their claims and defenses;
- The seriousness of the litigation risks;
- Whether experienced counsel reached the agreement through arm’s-length bargaining; and
- The possibility of fraud or collusion.
The court also stated that any attorney’s-fee provision must be assessed separately. Counsel must provide a factual basis for any fee award, including contemporaneous billing records showing, for each attorney, the date, hours worked, and nature of the work.
Order
Judge Vernon S. Broderick ordered the parties to provide the court with the settlement terms within 30 days of the order. The parties also had to submit a joint letter of no more than five pages explaining why they believed the settlement was a fair and reasonable compromise of disputed issues, including information about the five listed factors. If the settlement included attorney’s fees, the parties had to provide the required factual support and billing records.
The order required additional submissions; it did not state that the court approved or rejected the settlement.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.