Nunez Rodriguez v. Fordham Auto Plus, Inc.
- Katharine Parker
- 1:24-cv-06873
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Nunez Rodriguez v. Fordham Auto Plus, Judge Abrams ordered the parties to address court approval of their Fair Labor Standards Act settlement rather than close the case.
The plaintiff, Junior A. Nunez Rodriguez, and defendants Fordham Auto Plus, Inc. and Julio Cabrera, whose settlement requires court approval before the case can be closed.
What happened
In Nunez Rodriguez v. Fordham Auto Plus, the court said the case had been mistakenly treated as closed after the parties reached a settlement involving Fair Labor Standards Act claims. The settlement still required court approval.
The court gave the parties until April 21, 2025, to either agree to have Magistrate Judge Parker handle the remaining proceedings or submit a joint letter explaining why the settlement is fair and reasonable, with supporting materials.
Judge Ronnie Abrams also warned that materials used to evaluate the settlement may be publicly filed and identified settlement terms the court will not approve, including overly broad waivers of claims and bans on negative statements that do not protect truthful statements about the plaintiff’s experience litigating the case.
The detailed version
- Nunez Rodriguez v. Fordham Auto Plus, Inc. · No. 1:24-cv-06873
- Katharine Parker
- Mar. 24, 2025
Background
The court directed the parties to disregard its March 20, 2025 order that purported to close the case. The opinion states that Magistrate Judge Parker had explained in an order issued the same day that a settlement of claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act requires court approval.
Court’s Order
By April 21, 2025, the parties had to choose one of two options:
1. Consent to have all further proceedings conducted before Magistrate Judge Parker by completing the required consent form; or 2. Submit a joint letter explaining why their settlement is fair and reasonable and should be approved, together with all necessary supporting materials.
The court noted that materials on which it relies for its fairness determination will be placed on the public docket because judicial documents generally carry a presumption of public access.
Settlement Terms the Court Identified
The court stated that it will not approve settlement agreements in which the plaintiff waives practically any possible claim against the defendants, including unknown claims or claims unrelated to wage-and-hour issues. It also stated that it will not approve an agreement barring the plaintiff from making any negative statement about the defendants unless the agreement includes an exception for truthful statements about the plaintiff’s experience litigating the case.
Disposition
The court did not approve or reject the settlement in this order. It ordered the parties to take one of the specified steps by April 21, 2025. The order was signed by United States District Judge Ronnie Abrams.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.