Rothbart v. Central Marketing Services Inc.

Background

Ellen Rothbart brought this action against Central Marketing Services Inc., also identified as Central Marketing Inc., under the Family and Medical Leave Act, the Fair Labor Standards Act, and the New York Labor Law. The parties consented to the court’s authority to decide the case under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). After reaching an agreement in principle, they submitted an executed settlement agreement for judicial approval.

The court reviewed the plaintiff’s submission explaining why the settlement was fair, reasonable, and adequate. The court also held a telephone conference with counsel on March 25, 2020, concerning whether the case should be ended subject to a condition related to payment of the settlement amount.

Settlement Approval

The court approved the settlement agreement. It found that the agreement was fair, reasonable, and adequate both to address the plaintiff’s claims and to compensate the plaintiff’s counsel for legal fees.

The order did not incorporate the settlement’s terms. The parties also had not asked the court to retain jurisdiction—that is, continuing authority—to enforce the settlement. The court therefore made no independent decision to retain jurisdiction, and stated that its approval of the settlement did not itself create such continuing authority.

Disposition

The agreement required payment of the settlement amount within 21 days after court approval. It also provided that, if payment was not made after notice and an opportunity to cure, the plaintiff could declare the agreement void and refile or reopen the action. Based on the approval of the executed settlement agreement, Judge Debra Freeman ordered that the action be discontinued with prejudice and without costs. However, within 30 days of the order, if the agreed settlement payment had not been made, the plaintiff could apply by letter to restore the action to the court’s active calendar.