Murthada v. Hotels
- Vernon Broderick
- 1:23-cv-08615
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Al Sadik Murthada v. Highgate Hotels, Judge Broderick ordered entry of a $15,000 Rule 68 judgment despite concerns about the Fair Labor Standards Act terms.
The order affected Al Sadik Murthada and the defendants by directing entry of the $15,000 judgment under their accepted Rule 68 offer. The opinion does not state how that amount would be divided between the recovery and attorneys’ fees or costs.
What happened
Al Sadik Murthada v. Highgate Hotels, L.P., et al. is a Fair Labor Standards Act case in which the parties asked the court to enter judgment based on an accepted offer under a federal court rule called Rule 68.
The offer set the judgment amount at $15,000 but did not state how much would go to attorneys’ fees or costs. The court also could not compare the amount with Murthada’s maximum possible recovery, so the court said the terms would likely be unreasonable under the usual review process for Fair Labor Standards Act settlements.
Judge Vernon S. Broderick nevertheless ordered the judgment entered because a Second Circuit decision requires courts to enter Rule 68 judgments settling Fair Labor Standards Act claims without prior judicial approval. The judgment was to be filed at the same time as the order.
The detailed version
- Murthada v. Hotels · No. 1:23-cv-08615
- Vernon Broderick
- Sept. 16, 2025
Background
This case concerns claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act, a federal law governing certain wage and hour protections. The parties asked the court to enter judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 68, which allows a party to make an offer of judgment that the other party can accept. Murthada accepted the defendants’ offer, and the parties submitted a proposed judgment.
Court’s analysis
The court explained that, under the Second Circuit’s decision in Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc., parties generally cannot privately settle a Fair Labor Standards Act case without approval from the court or the Department of Labor. That review ordinarily allows the court to examine whether settlement terms are reasonable.
The court also explained that the Second Circuit later held in Mei Xing Yu v. Hasaki Restaurant, Inc. that judicial approval is not required for Rule 68 offers of judgment settling Fair Labor Standards Act claims. Judge Broderick stated that he had repeatedly expressed concern that this rule could require courts to enter judgments that would not pass the review required under Cheeks.
Here, the offer stated that the judgment amount would be $15,000 but did not identify the amount allocated to attorneys’ fees or costs. The court therefore could not determine whether those fees were reasonable. The court also could not compare the judgment amount with Murthada’s maximum possible recovery. It stated that it would likely consider these terms unreasonable if they had been presented for review under Cheeks.
Ruling
Despite those concerns, Judge Vernon S. Broderick ordered that judgment be entered according to the parties’ Rule 68 offer and acceptance. The court stated that the Second Circuit’s decision in Mei Xing Yu compelled that result. The judgment was to be filed simultaneously with the order.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.