Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 18, 2025

Conklin v. The United States Postal Service

Judge
Katharine Parker
Docket
1:23-cv-07122
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
FlsaEmploymentCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Conklin v. United States Postal Service, Judge Parker approved the parties’ federal wage-law settlement and discontinued the action with prejudice and without costs.

Who this affects

The plaintiffs, plaintiffs’ counsel, and the United States Postal Service are affected by the approved settlement. The court retained jurisdiction to enforce the settlement if necessary, and the case was closed subject to the order’s 30-day restoration provision.

What happened

In Conklin v. United States Postal Service, the plaintiffs brought claims under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act, a wage-and-hour law. The parties reached an agreement in principle to resolve the case and asked the court to approve their proposed settlement.

The court reviewed the settlement and the parties’ explanation of why it was fair, reasonable, and adequate. The court also considered the settlement’s terms and the parties’ positions as shown during a settlement mediation conducted by the court.

Judge Parker approved the settlement, including compensation for the plaintiffs’ claims and their lawyers’ fees. The court retained jurisdiction to enforce the settlement if necessary, discontinued the action with prejudice and without costs, and directed the Clerk to close the case. The plaintiffs may ask to restore the case if the written settlement documentation is not completed within 30 days.

The detailed version

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

Case
Conklin v. The United States Postal Service · No. 1:23-cv-07122
Judge
Katharine Parker
Date
Aug. 18, 2025

Background

The plaintiffs brought this action under the Fair Labor Standards Act, a federal law governing wages and working hours, against the United States Postal Service. The opinion does not describe the specific claims or the settlement amount.

The parties reached an agreement in principle to resolve the action and submitted their proposed settlement agreement for court approval. They also submitted a letter explaining why they believed the agreement was fair, reasonable, and adequate. Because settlements of Fair Labor Standards Act claims require judicial fairness review, the court evaluated whether the agreement was a reasonable compromise of the claims.

Court’s analysis

The court considered the parties’ letter, the settlement agreement’s terms, and its familiarity with the strengths and weaknesses of the parties’ positions from an arms-length settlement mediation conducted by the court. Based on the totality of the relevant circumstances, the court found that the settlement was fair, reasonable, and adequate both to redress the plaintiffs’ claims and to compensate plaintiffs’ counsel for legal fees.

Ruling and disposition

The court approved the proposed settlement. It retained jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement if necessary. As a result of the approval, the action was discontinued with prejudice and without costs. The order provided that, within 30 days of its date, the plaintiffs could apply by letter to restore the action to the active calendar if any part of the written settlement documentation was not completed. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case and terminate all conferences and motions on the docket.

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.