Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 10, 2025

Colon v. Yaaron LLC

Judge
Ricardo
Docket
1:23-cv-07127
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
FlsaCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Colon v. Yaaron LLC, Judge Ricardo approved the FLSA settlement and dismissed the case with prejudice.

Who this affects

The plaintiffs and defendants in this Fair Labor Standards Act wage-and-hour case are affected; the approved settlement resolves the case and bars refiling the dismissed case.

What happened

Colon v. Yaaron LLC was an action seeking damages under the Fair Labor Standards Act, a federal wage-and-hour law. The parties asked the court to approve a revised settlement agreement.

The court reviewed the agreement and supporting materials, considering the risks and costs of continuing, possible recovery, bargaining between the parties, attorney fees, and potential fraud or collusion. It found the agreement fair and reasonable.

Judge Henry J. Ricardo approved the settlement and dismissed and discontinued the entire case with prejudice, without costs or fees to any party except as provided in the settlement agreement. The clerk was directed to close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Colon v. Yaaron LLC · No. 1:23-cv-07127
Judge
Ricardo
Date
Mar. 10, 2025

Background

Rudy A. Colon and other plaintiffs brought an action for damages under the Fair Labor Standards Act, a federal law governing wages and working hours. The parties consented to the jurisdiction of the magistrate judge under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). They jointly asked the court to approve a revised settlement agreement, which they submitted fully executed on March 7, 2025.

Settlement Review

The court explained that it had to determine whether the settlement was fair and reasonable and resulted from arm’s-length negotiations rather than employer overreaching. The court reviewed the settlement agreement, the parties’ supporting letter, prior proceedings, retainer agreements, attorney time records, and expense records. It considered the risks, burdens, and costs of continuing the case; the possible range of recovery; whether the agreement resulted from arm’s-length bargaining; the attorney-fee amount; and the possibility of fraud or collusion.

The court noted that the agreement contained no confidentiality restrictions, narrowly limited the release to wage-and-hour claims, and provided attorney fees within a fair, reasonable, and acceptable range. Considering all the circumstances, the court found the agreement fair and reasonable and approved it.

Disposition

Judge Henry J. Ricardo ordered that the case, having been resolved by settlement, be dismissed and discontinued in its entirety, with prejudice, without costs or fees to any party except as provided in the settlement agreement. The clerk was directed to terminate all motions and deadlines and 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.