Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 13, 2020

Montes v. Tularcito Deli, LLC

Judge
Robert Lehrburger
Docket
1:18-cv-11613
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
FlsaEmploymentCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Montes v. Tularcita Bakery, LLC, Judge Lehrburger approved the parties’ fair and reasonable settlement of wage-and-hour claims.

Who this affects

The parties to the wage-and-hour action, including Margarita Montes and the other plaintiffs and Tularcita Bakery, LLC and the other defendants, are affected by the approved settlement.

What happened

Montes v. Tularcita Bakery, LLC involved claims for unpaid wages and related damages under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law. The parties jointly asked the court to approve their settlement.

The court reviewed the settlement and considered the risks, costs, possible recovery, attorney’s fees, and possibility of fraud or collusion. It noted that the agreement had no confidentiality restrictions and narrowly released wage-and-hour claims.

Judge Robert W. Lehrburger found the settlement fair and reasonable and approved it. The opinion does not state the settlement amount.

The detailed version

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

Case
Montes v. Tularcito Deli, LLC · No. 1:18-cv-11613
Judge
Robert Lehrburger
Date
Jan. 13, 2020

Background

The plaintiffs brought an action for damages under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), a federal wage-and-hour law, and the New York Labor Law. The parties submitted a joint request for approval of their fully executed settlement agreement on January 13, 2020.

Court’s Analysis

The court explained that a federal court must determine whether an FLSA settlement is fair and reasonable and resulted from arm’s-length bargaining—that is, negotiation without employer overreaching. The court had assisted with mediation and reviewed the settlement agreement and the parties’ letter. It considered the prior proceedings, the risks, burdens, and costs of continuing the case, the possible range of recovery, whether the agreement resulted from bargaining between experienced counsel or parties, the attorney’s fees, and the possibility of fraud or collusion.

The court also noted that the agreement contained no confidentiality restrictions, narrowly limited the release to wage-and-hour claims, and provided attorney’s fees within a fair, reasonable, and acceptable range. The opinion does not state the settlement amount.

Disposition

Judge Robert W. Lehrburger found that the settlement agreement was fair and reasonable and approved it. The order does not separately state any other disposition.

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.