Hall v. City of New York
- Barbara Moses
- 1:22-cv-10193
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 8
In Hall v. City of New York, U.S. Magistrate Judge Moses approved an adjusted FLSA settlement, did not approve undocumented expenses, and dismissed the action.
Dawn Hall and the 33 additional opt-in plaintiffs received the benefit of the approved settlement and the increased distribution fund; the City of New York resolved the plaintiffs' FLSA claims; plaintiffs' counsel did not receive the requested $17,141.58 in undocumented expense reimbursement.
What happened
In Hall v. City of New York, Dawn Hall and 33 other employees claimed that the City of New York violated federal overtime-pay law by mishandling overtime hours, meal breaks, and payment timing.
The parties agreed to an $800,575.25 settlement. The court approved attorney fees of $266,858.42 and a $2,500 claims-administrator fee, but did not approve $17,141.58 in additional expenses because counsel did not provide supporting records. That amount instead increased the fund distributed to the plaintiffs.
U.S. Magistrate Judge Barbara Moses granted the settlement motion, approved the settlement as adjusted, dismissed the action, and retained limited authority to enforce the settlement terms.
The detailed version
- Hall v. City of New York · No. 1:22-cv-10193
- Barbara Moses
- June 30, 2025
Background
Dawn Hall alleged that the City of New York violated the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), the federal law governing minimum wages and overtime pay. The alleged violations included recording overtime at straight-time pay instead of time-and-a-half, treating some overtime—including meal-break time—as noncompensable, and paying overtime wages late. Hall also alleged that other City employees were subject to the same policies.
The court conditionally certified an FLSA collective consisting of Construction Project Managers employed by the City's Department of Housing Preservation and Development since December 2, 2019. Thirty-three additional plaintiffs joined the case and agreed to be bound by any judgment or settlement concerning their FLSA claims.
After written discovery, mediation, and about seven and a half months of settlement negotiations, the parties asked the court to approve their agreement under the requirement that courts review FLSA settlements for fairness.
Settlement Terms and Fairness
The City agreed to pay $800,575.25 to resolve the plaintiffs' FLSA claims. The agreement provided for deductions of up to $266,858.42 in attorney fees, up to $17,141.58 in counsel expenses, a $15,000 service payment to Hall, and a $2,500 payment to Analytics LLC for claims-administration services.
The remaining money was to be distributed under a formula based on each plaintiff's alleged compensation, payroll, and time records. The court found the settlement amount fair and reasonable because it represented 69% of the plaintiffs' estimated maximum recovery of $1,161,006.91, while trial would have involved disputed issues and risks. The court also found the allocation formula, service payment, releases, and other nonfinancial terms fair. The releases were limited to FLSA wage claims, and the agreement contained no confidentiality or non-disparagement provision.
Fees and Expenses
The court independently reviewed the requested attorney fees. It approved $266,858.42, equal to one-third of the gross settlement, because the recovery was substantial and the requested amount was below counsel's documented lodestar—the amount calculated from the attorneys' recorded time multiplied by their hourly rates. The court also approved the $2,500 claims-administrator fee because it was supported by an invoice.
The court did not approve the additional $17,141.58 requested for counsel's expenses. The plaintiffs supplied no bills, invoices, receipts, or other records documenting those expenses, despite an earlier court order requiring supporting records. Under the agreement, the unapproved amount became part of the distribution fund. The court therefore calculated the Net Allocation Fund as $516,216.83, to be distributed among the settling plaintiffs under the agreed formula.
Disposition
Judge Barbara Moses granted the plaintiffs' letter-motion, approved the settlement and proposed notice as adjusted by the order, and dismissed the action. The court retained jurisdiction for the limited purpose of enforcing the settlement terms, and directed the Clerk of Court to close the case.
Read the full 8-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.