Lewis v. 402 8th Ave Restaurant Inc.
Domingo Lewis v. 402 8th Ave Restaurant Inc., doing business as Mollywee, and Angela Reilly
- Vyskocil
- 1:25-cv-04086
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Domingo Lewis v. 402 8th Ave Restaurant, Judge Vyskocil ordered a joint explanation before deciding whether to approve the parties’ proposed Fair Labor Standards Act settlement.
The plaintiff and defendants in the FLSA lawsuit, including the parties’ proposed settlement and the plaintiff’s attorney’s fee request.
What happened
In Domingo Lewis v. 402 8th Ave Restaurant Inc., doing business as Mollywee, and Angela Reilly, the parties told the court they had reached a settlement in principle. The lawsuit includes claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act, which requires court approval of the settlement.
The court ordered the parties to submit a joint letter by November 14, 2025. The letter must explain why the proposed settlement is fair and reasonable, including the possible recovery, litigation costs and risks, negotiations, and any fraud or collusion concerns. It must also address whether there is a genuine dispute about hours worked or compensation and how much the plaintiff’s attorney will seek in fees.
Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil did not approve or reject the proposed settlement in this order. She directed the parties to provide the requested information so the court can review the settlement’s fairness.
The detailed version
- Lewis v. 402 8th Ave Restaurant Inc. · No. 1:25-cv-04086
- Vyskocil
- Oct. 15, 2025
Background
The parties filed a letter stating that they had reached a settlement in principle. The complaint asserts claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), a federal law governing wages and working hours.
Court’s Analysis
The court explained that an FLSA settlement requires approval by either the district court or the United States Department of Labor. The court must examine whether the proposed agreement is a fair and reasonable compromise of disputed issues rather than an improper waiver of statutory rights caused by employer overreaching.
The court directed the parties to address five fairness factors in a joint letter: (1) the plaintiff’s possible recovery; (2) the extent to which the settlement would avoid the burdens and expenses of proving the parties’ claims and defenses; (3) the seriousness of the litigation risks; (4) whether experienced counsel negotiated the agreement at arm’s length; and (5) the possibility of fraud or collusion. The parties must also explain whether a genuine dispute exists about the number of hours worked or the compensation owed, and how much the plaintiff’s attorney will seek in fees. The court stated that, absent special circumstances, it will not approve a settlement filed under seal or in redacted form.
Order and Effect
Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil ordered the parties to submit the joint letter by November 14, 2025. This order did not approve or reject the proposed settlement; it required more information before the court decides whether approval is appropriate.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.