Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Nov. 25, 2019

Williams v. Movage, Inc.

Judge
Katherine Failla
Docket
1:17-cv-02628
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Fee PetitionFlsaCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Williams v. Movage, Judge Failla granted the parties until December 2, 2019, to file a proposed judgment and plaintiffs’ fee-approval motion.

Who this affects

The parties and plaintiffs’ counsel in the Williams v. Movage collective action, who received additional time to file the proposed judgment and fee-approval motion.

What happened

In Williams v. Movage, the plaintiffs’ lawyer told the court that the parties had agreed on $60,000 for attorney fees and costs after negotiations following the plaintiffs’ acceptance of the defendants’ offer of judgment. The lawyer requested more time to prepare the proposed judgment and a motion asking the court to review the wage-and-hour settlement and fees.

The requested extension was needed to address the plaintiffs’ shares of the judgment, divide fees between plaintiffs’ lawyers, and prepare the fee-approval motion. The lawyer also cited additional negotiations with defense counsel and the Thanksgiving holiday.

Judge Katherine Polk Failla granted the application. The parties had until December 2, 2019, to file the proposed judgment and the plaintiffs’ fee-approval motion.

The detailed version

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

Case
Williams v. Movage, Inc. · No. 1:17-cv-02628
Judge
Katherine Failla
Date
Nov. 25, 2019

Background

Plaintiffs’ counsel reported that the parties had agreed to $60,000 in attorney fees and costs after week-long negotiations. The letter stated that the agreement followed the plaintiffs’ acceptance of the defendants’ offer of judgment in a collective action under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Counsel requested an extension of time to submit a proposed judgment and a motion for court review of the wage-and-hour settlement and attorney-fee arrangement, commonly called a “Cheeks motion.”

Counsel said additional work was needed to account for the plaintiffs’ pro rata participation in the judgment, divide the attorney fee between co-counsel, and negotiate the proposed judgment and fee motion with opposing counsel. Counsel also cited the Thanksgiving holiday and the shortened workweek.

Court’s Action

Judge Katherine Polk Failla endorsed and granted the application. The order gave the parties until December 2, 2019, to file the proposed judgment and the plaintiffs’ Cheeks motion. The order did not itself approve the settlement, award the fees, or decide the amount of any individual plaintiff’s recovery.

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.