Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 23, 2020

Medina v. 163 Ashley Deli Grocery

Judge
Barbara Moses
Docket
1:19-cv-11443
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
FlsaCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Medina v. 163 Ashley Deli Grocery, Judge Moses postponed the settlement conference and ordered a fairness submission for the reported Fair Labor Standards Act settlement.

Who this affects

The parties to the reported FLSA settlement and their counsel, particularly anyone seeking court approval of settlement terms or an award of attorney fees and costs.

What happened

In Medina v. 163 Ashley Deli Grocery, the parties reported that they had settled their dispute, including claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The order does not describe the settlement's terms or approve it.

The court postponed the March 23, 2020 settlement conference indefinitely and canceled all previously set deadlines. It ordered the parties to submit a joint explanation of why the settlement is fair, the signed agreement, and materials supporting any request for attorney fees and costs by April 22, 2020.

Judge Barbara Moses also cautioned that settlement agreements in wage-and-hour cases generally should not contain inappropriate confidentiality terms, overly broad releases, or non-disparagement provisions that block truthful statements. The order further stated that the court would review the reasonableness of any attorney-fee award.

The detailed version

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

Case
Medina v. 163 Ashley Deli Grocery · No. 1:19-cv-11443
Judge
Barbara Moses
Date
Mar. 23, 2020

Background

The parties reported that they had settled their dispute, including claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The opinion does not provide the settlement amount, the settlement's substantive terms, or the underlying wage-and-hour allegations.

Orders Regarding the Settlement

The court ordered that the settlement conference scheduled for March 23, 2020, be adjourned indefinitely. It also vacated all deadlines previously set in the action.

By April 22, 2020, the parties were ordered to submit three items: (1) a joint letter explaining why the settlement is fair and reasonable under the factors identified in Wolinsky v. Scholastic Inc.; (2) a written settlement agreement signed by all parties, which would be placed on the public docket; and (3) any contingency-fee agreement and time and expense records needed to support an award of attorney fees and costs.

Court's Cautions

The court cautioned that confidentiality provisions would be appropriate only in rare wage-and-hour cases because of the policy concerns underlying the FLSA. It gave a similar warning about non-disparagement clauses that would prevent the plaintiff from making truthful statements about the employment, the lawsuit, or the settlement.

The court also stated that courts in the district ordinarily refuse to approve one-way or overly broad general releases in FLSA settlements. Any proposed attorney-fee and cost award had to be included in the written settlement agreement, signed by the parties, supported by properly authenticated records, and accompanied by a detailed explanation. The court emphasized that the degree of success obtained is the most important factor in evaluating the reasonableness of a fee award.

Disposition

The order did not approve or reject the settlement. It required the parties to submit materials for the court's fairness review and advised that they could consent to have the assigned magistrate judge conduct all proceedings. If they did not consent, their settlement submission had to follow the individual practices of the assigned district judge.

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.