Souffrant v. Grambro Realty Corp.
- Barbara Moses
- 1:19-cv-05482
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Souffrant v. 14-15 Mertens Place Corp., Judge Moses vacated deadlines and required papers supporting approval of the parties’ FLSA settlement.
Sidney Souffrant, the defendants, and their counsel were required to address the proposed FLSA settlement, any attorneys’ fees and costs, and the court’s settlement-review requirements.
What happened
Sidney Souffrant v. 14-15 Mertens Place Corp., et al. involved a settled dispute that included claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The parties later agreed that Judge Moses would handle the remaining proceedings.
The court vacated all previously set deadlines. It ordered the parties to submit by February 21, 2020, a joint explanation showing that the settlement was fair and reasonable, the written settlement agreement, and supporting records for any request for attorneys’ fees and costs.
Judge Barbara Moses also cautioned that confidentiality provisions, certain non-disparagement clauses, and broad one-way releases may prevent approval of an FLSA settlement. She further stated that fees exceeding one-third of the settlement fund are rarely approved without special circumstances and must be supported by detailed records.
The detailed version
- Souffrant v. Grambro Realty Corp. · No. 1:19-cv-05482
- Barbara Moses
- Jan. 31, 2020
Background
The action was referred to Judge Moses for settlement. The parties reported that they had settled their dispute, including claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). They then consented to Judge Moses’s authority to conduct all remaining proceedings under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).
Order
The court vacated all deadlines previously set in the action. It ordered the parties to submit, by February 21, 2020: (1) a joint letter explaining why the settlement was fair and reasonable under the factors identified in Wolinsky v. Scholastic Inc.; (2) a copy of the written settlement agreement, which would be filed on the public docket; and (3) counsel’s time and expense records as needed to support any request for attorneys’ fees and costs.
Settlement and fee cautions
The court cautioned that confidentiality provisions are rarely appropriate in resolving wage-and-hour lawsuits under the FLSA. It also cautioned that a non-disparagement provision may be unacceptable if it prevents the plaintiff from making truthful statements about his employment, the lawsuit, or the settlement; such a provision should include an exception for truthful statements about those matters.
The court further stated that courts in the Southern District of New York ordinarily refuse to approve FLSA settlements containing one-way or overly broad general releases. It expected any request for attorneys’ fees and costs to include a detailed explanation supported by counsel’s time and expense records. The court noted that fees exceeding one-third of the settlement fund are rarely approved without special circumstances, and that the relevant denominator is the settlement amount after costs are deducted.
Disposition
The order did not approve or reject the settlement. It vacated the existing deadlines and required the parties to provide materials for the court’s review of the proposed settlement and any fee request. Judge Moses signed the order on January 31, 2020.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.