Quiroz v. Silo East Inc.
- Katharine Parker
- 1:18-cv-04268
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Quiroz v. Silo East, Judge Parker approved the settlement and discontinued the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law case with prejudice.
The plaintiffs, defendants, and plaintiffs’ counsel were affected: the court approved their settlement, discontinued the action with prejudice and without costs, and directed that the case be closed, subject to the stated 30-day restoration provision.
What happened
Quiroz v. Silo East Inc. involved claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law. The parties reached an agreement in principle and asked the court to approve their proposed settlement.
The court reviewed the settlement, the plaintiffs’ explanation of why it was fair, the agreement’s terms, and the strengths and weaknesses of the parties’ positions. It found the settlement fair, reasonable, and adequate for the plaintiffs and their lawyers.
Judge Katharine H. Parker approved the settlement and discontinued the action with prejudice and without costs. The plaintiffs could ask to restore the case within 30 days if any written settlement documents were not completed, and the clerk was directed to close the case.
The detailed version
- Quiroz v. Silo East Inc. · No. 1:18-cv-04268
- Katharine Parker
- Mar. 19, 2020
Background
The plaintiffs brought claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law. The parties consented to the court’s authority to decide the matter and, after reaching an agreement in principle, submitted a proposed settlement for judicial approval.
Settlement Review
Because Fair Labor Standards Act settlements require judicial review for fairness, the court examined the parties’ submissions. It considered the plaintiffs’ letter explaining why the agreement was fair, reasonable, and adequate; the settlement’s terms; the totality of the relevant circumstances; and the strengths and weaknesses of the parties’ positions, which the court observed during an arms-length mediation it conducted.
Ruling
The court found that the proposed settlement was fair, reasonable, and adequate both to address the plaintiffs’ claims and to compensate plaintiffs’ counsel for legal fees. The court therefore approved the agreement.
As a result, the court discontinued the action with prejudice and without costs. The order allowed the plaintiffs, within 30 days, to apply by letter to restore the action to the active calendar if any part of the written settlement documentation was not completed. The clerk was directed to close the case.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.