Tovar v. The Empire Shoe Repairing Corp.
- Vernon Broderick
- 1:19-cv-03474
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Tovar v. The Empire Shoe Repairing Corp., Judge Broderick ordered the parties to submit their FLSA settlement terms and fairness explanation.
The parties to the FLSA case—Ciro Fabio Tovar, The Empire Shoe Repairing Corp. doing business as Empire Shoe Repair, and George Dzhurayev—must submit the settlement terms, a joint fairness explanation, and any required attorney-fee records.
What happened
Tovar v. The Empire Shoe Repairing Corp. is a Fair Labor Standards Act case in which the court was told that the parties had reached a settlement through mediation.
The court explained that the parties could not privately settle the wage claims with prejudice without approval from the court or the Department of Labor. It ordered them to provide the settlement terms and a joint explanation showing why the agreement was a fair and reasonable compromise.
Judge Vernon S. Broderick also ordered the parties to provide supporting records for any attorney-fee request, including billing records identifying each attorney’s dates, hours, and work. The order did not approve or reject the settlement; it required the parties to submit additional information within 30 days.
The detailed version
- Tovar v. The Empire Shoe Repairing Corp. · No. 1:19-cv-03474
- Vernon Broderick
- Nov. 25, 2019
Background
The court was advised that the parties had successfully mediated this Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) case. The opinion states that private settlement of FLSA claims with prejudice requires approval by the district court or the Department of Labor.
Court’s Analysis
The court explained that it must determine whether the proposed settlement is fair and reasonable by considering the total circumstances. The listed factors include the plaintiff’s possible recovery, the burdens and expenses the settlement would avoid, the parties’ litigation risks, whether experienced counsel negotiated at arm’s length, and the possibility of fraud or collusion.
If the settlement includes attorney’s fees, the court must separately evaluate whether those fees are reasonable. The court stated that counsel must provide a factual basis for the fee award, including contemporaneous billing records showing each attorney’s date of work, hours spent, and work performed.
Order and Effect
The court ordered the parties to submit the settlement terms within 30 days. It also ordered them to submit a joint letter of no more than five pages explaining why the settlement is a fair and reasonable compromise of disputed issues, including information concerning the listed factors. If the agreement includes attorney’s fees, the parties must provide the required supporting evidence. The court did not state that it approved or rejected the settlement in this order.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.