Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 30, 2025

Tillett v. Church Pension Group Services Corporation

Judge
Robert Lehrburger
Docket
1:24-cv-05779
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
FlsaEmploymentCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Tillett v. Church Pension Group Services Corporation, Judge Lehrburger approved the settlement and dismissed the case with prejudice.

Who this affects

Vanessa Tillett and Church Pension Group Services Corporation are affected because their wage-and-hour case was resolved through the approved settlement and dismissed and discontinued in its entirety with prejudice.

What happened

Vanessa Tillett sued Church Pension Group Services Corporation for damages under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law. The parties asked the court to approve their settlement.

Judge Lehrburger reviewed the agreement and the parties’ explanation, including the risks and costs of continuing the case, possible recovery, attorney’s fees, and whether the agreement resulted from fair negotiations. The agreement had no confidentiality or non-disparagement provisions, and the court found the fees fair and reasonable.

Judge Robert W. Lehrburger found the settlement fair and reasonable, approved it, and dismissed and discontinued the entire case with prejudice. The dismissal was without costs or fees to either party except as provided in the settlement agreement, and the court directed the Clerk to close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Tillett v. Church Pension Group Services Corporation · No. 1:24-cv-05779
Judge
Robert Lehrburger
Date
Apr. 30, 2025

Background

Vanessa Tillett brought an action for damages against Church Pension Group Services Corporation under the Fair Labor Standards Act, a federal wage-and-hour law, and the New York Labor Law. The parties jointly asked the court to approve their settlement agreement. A partially executed agreement was submitted on April 22, 2025, and a fully executed agreement was submitted on April 30, 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 and the parties’ April 22 letter. It considered, among other things, prior proceedings in the case, the risks, burdens, and costs of continuing the litigation, the possible recovery, the bargaining process, attorney’s fees, and the possibility of fraud or collusion.

The court noted that the agreement contained no confidentiality restrictions and no non-disparagement provisions. It found the attorney’s fees to be within a fair, reasonable, and acceptable range. Although Tillett’s release extended beyond wage-and-hour claims, the court stated that the defendants’ payment included that release and that the defendants provided a comparable general release.

Ruling

Judge Robert W. Lehrburger found the settlement agreement fair and reasonable and approved it. Because the case was resolved by settlement, the court dismissed and discontinued it in its entirety, with prejudice, without costs or fees to any party except as provided in the settlement agreement. The court also directed the Clerk of Court 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.