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

Lowery v. Police Athletic League, Inc.

Judge
Sidney Stein
Docket
1:24-cv-06607
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
FlsaEmploymentCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Lowery v. Police Athletic League, Judge Gary Stein ordered the parties to jointly seek approval of their FLSA settlement.

Who this affects

Vincent Lowery and Police Athletic League, Inc., whose settlement included an FLSA claim requiring a court-approval filing.

What happened

In Lowery v. Police Athletic League, Inc., the court was told that the parties had reached a settlement including a claim under the Fair Labor Standards Act, a federal wage law. They planned to ask the court to approve dismissal of that claim.

The court directed the parties to submit a joint motion by January 31, 2025 explaining why the settlement was fair and should be approved. The motion must discuss specified fairness factors and include the settlement agreement. If the settlement included attorney’s fees, the parties also had to explain why those fees were reasonable.

Judge Gary Stein issued this order after the parties consented to his jurisdiction. The order directed a future settlement-approval filing; it did not itself approve the settlement or dismiss the claim.

The detailed version

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

Case
Lowery v. Police Athletic League, Inc. · No. 1:24-cv-06607
Judge
Sidney Stein
Date
Jan. 7, 2025

Background The court stated that the parties had advised it that they had reached a settlement in the case. The settlement included a claim under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The parties intended to seek court approval to dismiss that claim under the required review process for certain FLSA settlements. The parties also consented to the jurisdiction of United States Magistrate Judge Gary Stein.

Court’s order The court directed the parties to submit a joint motion by January 31, 2025 explaining why their settlement was fair and should be approved. The motion had to address the fairness considerations identified in Wolinsky v. Scholastic Inc. and include the settlement agreement as an exhibit. If the settlement provided for attorney’s fees, the parties also had to address whether those fees were reasonable under the framework identified in Goldberger v. Integrated Resources, Inc.

Disposition The order directed the parties to file the joint settlement-approval motion. It did not approve the settlement or dismiss the FLSA claim.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.