Zaragoza v. Pappas OG LLC
Jose Ezdrain Alcocer Zaragoza v. Pappas OG LLC, and Stratis Morfogen, as an individual
- Lorna Schofield
- 1:24-cv-08644
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Jose Ezdrain Alcocer Zaragoza v. Pappas OG LLC, Judge Schofield denied settlement approval because its release was too broad.
The plaintiff and defendants are affected because their proposed settlement was not approved, and they must either amend the agreement to narrow its release or continue the litigation.
What happened
Jose Ezdrain Alcocer Zaragoza v. Pappas OG LLC, and Stratis Morfogen, as an individual, is a wage-and-hour case under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The parties jointly asked the court to approve their settlement.
The court found that the proposed agreement released claims far beyond the wage-and-hour issues in this case. Its release covered known and unknown claims based on acts or matters occurring up to dismissal of the action.
Judge Lorna G. Schofield denied approval at this time. She ordered the parties to report by October 24, 2025 whether they will amend the agreement or continue the litigation; any amended agreement must address the overly broad release.
The detailed version
- Zaragoza v. Pappas OG LLC · No. 1:24-cv-08644
- Lorna Schofield
- Oct. 3, 2025
Background
The action arises under the Fair Labor Standards Act, a federal wage-and-hour law. On September 29, 2025, the parties filed a joint letter asking the court to approve their settlement. The court explained that settlements in these cases must be reviewed to determine whether they are fair and reasonable.
Reason for the Ruling
The proposed settlement agreement included a release in Section 8. That provision would have released Pappas OG LLC from claims alleged or that could have been alleged in the complaint, including claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law, as well as claims based on any acts, omissions, conduct, thing, or matter, whether known or unknown, through the date the court dismissed the action.
The court found that this release was overly broad and was inconsistent with the requirement that a settlement release be expressly limited to the plaintiff’s wage-and-hour issues in this action. The court stated that the agreement therefore could not be approved in its current form.
Disposition
Judge Lorna G. Schofield denied approval of the settlement agreement at this time. The parties must file a letter by October 24, 2025, stating whether they will amend the settlement agreement or proceed with the litigation. If they choose to amend it, they must file an amended agreement addressing the release provision. The court stated that it will issue a separate order concerning attorneys’ fees and costs after approval of any amendment or agreement.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.