Santos v. Rogans Realty Corp
- Gabriel Gorenstein
- 1:23-cv-03726
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Santos v. Rogans Realty Corp, Judge Gorenstein ordered the parties to submit information supporting the fairness of their proposed Fair Labor Standards Act settlement.
Pedro Santos, Rogans Realty Corp., and the other defendants, who must jointly submit information and documents about the proposed settlement by February 11, 2025.
What happened
Santos v. Rogans Realty Corp. involves one or more claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The court noted that the parties have proposed a settlement requiring review under Second Circuit precedent.
The parties must file a joint letter or motion by February 11, 2025, explaining whether the settlement is fair and reasonable. The submission must address the claims and defenses, potential damages, the strengths and weaknesses of each side’s case, the negotiation process, and any reasons the settlement amount differs from the potential value of the claims. It must also include attorney-fee information, supporting documents for requested costs, and the settlement agreement.
Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein issued the order on January 28, 2025. The order requires the parties to provide information for the court’s review; it does not itself approve or reject the proposed settlement.
The detailed version
- Santos v. Rogans Realty Corp · No. 1:23-cv-03726
- Gabriel Gorenstein
- Jan. 28, 2025
Background
The opinion states that the case contains one or more claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act, a federal law governing matters such as minimum wages and overtime. The parties have proposed a settlement. The court cited Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc., a Second Circuit decision requiring judicial review of certain Fair Labor Standards Act settlements.
Required Filing
The court ordered the parties to file a joint letter or motion by February 11, 2025, addressing whether the proposed settlement is fair and reasonable. The filing must discuss:
- the claims and defenses; - the defendants’ potential monetary exposure and the basis for calculating it; - the strengths and weaknesses of the plaintiff’s case and the defendants’ defenses; - any factors explaining a difference between the potential value of the plaintiff’s claims and the settlement amount; - the litigation and negotiation process; and - any other issues relevant to whether the settlement is reasonable, including whether a judgment would be collectible if the case proceeded to trial.
The filing must also disclose the attorney-fee arrangement, attach the retainer agreement, and provide information about the actual attorney fees incurred. Requests for costs or expenses other than the filing fee must be supported by copies of invoices. The parties must attach the settlement agreement itself.
Disposition
The court issued an order requiring the specified joint submission. It did not approve or reject the proposed settlement in this order.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.