Portillo v. Coleman Plan A Group LLC

Background

The plaintiffs brought this action under the Fair Labor Standards Act, a federal law governing matters including overtime pay. The parties notified the court that they had reached a settlement in principle.

The court explained that an employer that violates the overtime-pay requirement must pay the unpaid overtime and an equal amount as additional damages. It also explained that an FLSA settlement, including any proposed attorney-fee award, must be reviewed to ensure that it is fair.

Order

The court ordered the parties to submit the settlement agreement and a joint letter by January 14, 2020. The letter had to explain the basis for the proposed settlement and why it should be approved as fair and reasonable, addressing the factors identified in the court's cited precedent. The letter also had to address any incentive payments to the plaintiff and any attorney-fee award to the plaintiff's counsel, with supporting documentation where appropriate.

The court advised that the parties could consent to proceed before the assigned Magistrate Judge for purposes of deciding whether to approve the settlement. If all parties consented, they were instructed to email the completed consent form by January 14, 2020.

The court stated that it would not approve a settlement containing a confidentiality provision unless the parties provided sufficient, case-specific reasons to overcome the public-access right in judicial documents. It likewise would not approve a release or waiver covering claims that had not accrued or claims unrelated to wage-and-hour matters without case-specific justification. The court also would not approve a non-disparagement provision barring negative statements about a defendant unless it allowed truthful statements about the plaintiff's experience litigating the case, absent case-specific reasons justifying the broader provision.

If the agreement included any of those provisions, the parties had to state whether they would follow the rest of the settlement without the unacceptable provision or would abandon the settlement and continue litigating if the court did not approve that provision. The court adjourned the scheduled pretrial conference and all pending deadlines while awaiting the settlement submission. Judge Jesse M. Furman did not approve the settlement in this order.