Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 2, 2020

De Jesus Torres v. HWF Realty Management, INC.

Judge
Paul Crotty
Docket
1:18-cv-00994
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
5
Civil ProcedureFlsa
In one sentence

In De Jesus Torres v. HWF Realty, Judge Crotty ordered entry of the accepted settlement judgment and closed the case after denying reconsideration as moot.

Who this affects

The plaintiffs, including Roque De Jesus Torres, and HWF Realty Management, Inc.; the Clerk of Court was directed to enter the accepted Rule 68 offer of judgment and close the case.

What happened

In De Jesus Torres v. HWF Realty Management, INC., the parties asked the court to enter judgment on an accepted offer under Rule 68, a procedure for resolving a case by having one side accept a formal judgment offer. The dispute involved wage claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The court had earlier refused to approve the parties’ settlement because it believed judicial review was required for fair wage settlements. The Second Circuit later ruled in Hasaki that court approval is not required for Rule 68 offers resolving Fair Labor Standards Act claims.

Judge Paul A. Crotty therefore directed the Clerk of Court to enter the offer of judgment, denied the reconsideration motion as moot, and directed the Clerk to close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
De Jesus Torres v. HWF Realty Management, INC. · No. 1:18-cv-00994
Judge
Paul Crotty
Date
Mar. 2, 2020

Background

The plaintiffs and HWF Realty Management, Inc. brought the court an accepted Rule 68 offer of judgment resolving a wage-and-hour claim under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), a federal law governing wages and working hours. The parties executed the offer and acceptance on August 28, 2019.

The court had previously declined to approve the arrangement because the Second Circuit’s decision in Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House required judicial review of private FLSA settlements to ensure that they were fair. The parties then moved for reconsideration and asked the court to stay the case while the Second Circuit considered Hasaki. The court stated that it was not persuaded that Rule 68 allowed the parties to avoid review under the FLSA and Cheeks.

Governing Decision

On December 6, 2019, the Second Circuit issued its decision in Hasaki. That decision held that the FLSA does not require judicial approval of Rule 68(a) offers of judgment resolving FLSA claims. The court explained that it was bound by that precedent even though it believed unsupervised Rule 68 settlements could create a risk of abuse, including excessive attorney-fee allocations or overly broad releases.

Ruling

Judge Paul A. Crotty granted the parties’ request for an order directing the Clerk of Court to enter judgment on the accepted Rule 68 offer. The court directed the Clerk to enter the offer submitted at Docket 57, denied the motion for reconsideration at Docket 60 as moot, and directed the Clerk to close the case. The opinion does not state the amount or other terms of the judgment.

Effect

The ruling required entry of the accepted Rule 68 judgment and ended the case administratively. It did not decide the underlying wage claim after a trial or merits determination; the court acted in response to the parties’ accepted judgment offer and the controlling Second Circuit decision.

The authoritative version

Read the full 5-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.