Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 7, 2025

Cameron v. Prosegur Services Group, Inc.

Judge
Vargas
Docket
1:24-cv-07156
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
FlsaFee PetitionCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Cameron v. Prosegur, Judge Vargas approved the Fair Labor Standards Act settlement, awarded fees and costs, and dismissed the case with prejudice.

Who this affects

Dale Cameron and Prosegur Services Group, Inc.; the ruling approved their settlement, fees, and costs and ended the case.

What happened

Dale Cameron brought this Fair Labor Standards Act case against Prosegur Services Group, Inc., and the parties reached a settlement. The court reviewed the settlement because settlements of these wage claims require judicial approval.

The court found the settlement fair and reasonable based on Cameron’s individual claim, the risks of further litigation, and the related expenses. It also approved $10,507 in attorney’s fees and $478 in costs, correcting a $481 cost total listed in the signed agreement.

Judge Jeannette A. Vargas approved the settlement, subject to a requirement that the court approve any later modification. The court dismissed the case with prejudice, ruled that all pending motions were moot, and directed the Clerk to close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Cameron v. Prosegur Services Group, Inc. · No. 1:24-cv-07156
Judge
Vargas
Date
Jan. 7, 2025

Background

Dale Cameron brought this action under the Fair Labor Standards Act, a federal law governing wages and working hours, against Prosegur Services Group, Inc. The parties informed the court that they had agreed to settle. The court then required them either to explain the status of their discussions or submit the settlement for judicial approval.

Settlement Review

The court reviewed Cameron’s request for approval under the standard requiring judicial review of Fair Labor Standards Act settlements. It found the settlement fair and reasonable, considering the nature and scope of Cameron’s individual claim and the risks and expenses of continued litigation. The court also noted that Cameron no longer worked for Prosegur, reducing concerns that the settlement or release was obtained through job-related pressure.

Fees and Costs

Cameron requested approval of $10,507 in attorney’s fees after costs. That amount represented one-third of the $31,522 net settlement amount. The court found the fee reasonable because fees in this circuit commonly range from 30% to 33% and the requested amount was consistent with the relevant contingency-fee arrangement and marketplace practice discussed in the opinion.

Cameron’s attorney also requested $402 in filing fees and $76 for service of process, for total costs of $478. The court noted that the signed settlement agreement incorrectly listed total costs of $481. Based on the submitted receipts and Cameron’s letter, the court approved costs of $478.

Ruling

The court approved the settlement subject to the condition that any modification of the settlement agreement must receive court approval, even if the agreement purported to allow the parties to modify it without court approval. The court dismissed the case with prejudice, ruled that all pending motions were moot, and directed the Clerk of Court to close the case.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.