Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 25, 2025

Angel Espinobarros v. El Encanto De Lola 2 LLC

Judge
Clarke
Docket
1:24-cv-01048
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
FlsaCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Luis Angel Espinobarros v. El Encanto De Lola 2 LLC, Judge Clarke ordered settlement disclosures for Fair Labor Standards Act approval.

Who this affects

The plaintiffs, including Luis Angel Espinobarros, and El Encanto De Lola 2 LLC and the other defendants who reached the proposed settlement.

What happened

Luis Angel Espinobarros and other plaintiffs reached a settlement with El Encanto De Lola 2 LLC and other defendants in a Fair Labor Standards Act case. The opinion does not provide the settlement terms.

The court explained that these wage-law claims cannot be privately settled without approval from the court or the Department of Labor. The court must determine whether the settlement is fair and reasonable, and must separately review any attorney-fee provision and closely examine any release, confidentiality, or non-disparagement provision.

Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke ordered the parties to submit the settlement terms within 30 days, along with a joint letter of no more than five pages explaining why the settlement is fair and reasonable. If applicable, they must also provide support for attorney fees and for any release, confidentiality, or non-disparagement provision.

The detailed version

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

Case
Angel Espinobarros v. El Encanto De Lola 2 LLC · No. 1:24-cv-01048
Judge
Clarke
Date
Feb. 25, 2025

Background

The parties told the court that they had reached a settlement in this Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) case. The opinion does not state the settlement amount or other terms.

Court’s analysis

The court explained that FLSA claims generally cannot be privately settled without approval from the district court or the Department of Labor. To approve the settlement, the court must decide whether it is fair and reasonable based on the total circumstances. The listed considerations include the plaintiffs’ possible recovery, the burdens and expenses the settlement may avoid, the litigation risks, whether experienced counsel negotiated at arm’s length, and the possibility of fraud or collusion.

If the settlement provides for attorney’s fees, the court must separately assess whether those fees are reasonable. Counsel must provide a factual basis for the award, including contemporaneous billing records identifying each attorney’s date of work, hours spent, and work performed. The court also must closely examine any release, confidentiality, or non-disparagement provision and require support for each provision, including relevant case citations.

Order

Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke ordered the parties to provide the settlement terms within 30 days so the court can determine whether they are fair and reflect a reasonable compromise of disputed issues. The parties must also submit a joint letter of no more than five pages addressing the five listed fairness factors and other relevant information. If applicable, they must submit evidence supporting attorney’s fees and support for any release, confidentiality, or non-disparagement provision. The court also reminded the parties that they may consent to a magistrate judge’s jurisdiction to review and approve the settlement if all parties agree. The order does not itself approve or reject the settlement.

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.