Bose v. Young Adult Institute
Shante Bose and Rashelle Mansfield, on behalf of themselves, FLSA Collective and the Class v. Young Adult Institute, Inc. d/b/a YAI
- Vernon Broderick
- 1:23-cv-00496
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Bose v. Young Adult Institute, Judge Broderick scheduled a second fairness hearing because 23 class members missed the initial notice.
The 23 class members who were not initially mailed the notice packet, the other class members, the Plaintiffs, Young Adult Institute, Inc. d/b/a YAI, and the parties’ attorneys and claims administrator are affected by the additional notice, briefing, and fairness-hearing requirements.
What happened
Shante Bose and Rashelle Mansfield brought this class and Fair Labor Standards Act collective action against Young Adult Institute, Inc., doing business as YAI. The parties asked the court to approve their class settlement, service awards, and attorneys’ fees, costs, and expenses.
The filings stated that 23 class members were not initially mailed the required notice. Because those members must have an opportunity to object before the settlement can be approved, the court required additional notice and information. The court did not issue final approval in this order.
Judge Vernon S. Broderick scheduled a second fairness hearing for January 12, 2026, and required supplemental briefing by January 5, 2026. The previously noticed hearing on November 6, 2025, would also proceed, and the supplemental materials must address objections or opt-outs, attorney time records, administration costs, and the requested fees.
The detailed version
- Bose v. Young Adult Institute · No. 1:23-cv-00496
- Vernon Broderick
- Nov. 3, 2025
Background
The parties submitted materials seeking final approval of a class settlement, approval of service awards, and approval of attorneys’ fees, costs, and expenses. The filings explained that 23 class members were not initially mailed the notice packet because of an administrative oversight.
Court’s Action
The court stated that it must consider objections from any class member before approving a class settlement. It therefore scheduled a second fairness hearing for January 12, 2026, at 10:00 a.m. at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, Courtroom 518, 40 Foley Square, New York, New York.
The court required Plaintiffs to submit supplemental briefing by January 5, 2026. The briefing must include any additional objections or opt-outs from the 23 omitted class members; time sheets and a chart of hours billed by each timekeeper sufficient to allow the court to calculate the stated lodestar amount of $210,417.50; a detailed breakdown of the $150,000 claims-administration fee and Plaintiffs’ position on its reasonableness; and Plaintiffs’ position on whether the requested attorneys’ fees are reasonable as a percentage of the recovery after administrative costs are deducted.
The court also stated that the previously announced fairness hearing on November 6, 2025, at 2:00 p.m. would proceed because that date and time had been included in the notice packet. This order scheduled additional proceedings and requested more information; it did not state that final approval of the settlement, service awards, or fees had been granted or denied. Judge Vernon S. Broderick entered the order on November 3, 2025.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.