Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 10, 2020

Nesbeth v. New York City Management LLC

Judge
John Koeltl
Docket
1:17-cv-08650
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
FlsaCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Nesbeth v. New York City Management LLC, Judge Cave approved the FLSA settlement and dismissed the case with prejudice.

Who this affects

Nicholas Nesbeth and the defendants are bound by the approved settlement; the action was dismissed with prejudice, and the court retained jurisdiction to enforce the agreement.

What happened

Nicholas Nesbeth and the defendants asked the court to approve their proposed settlement of this wage-and-hour case under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The parties agreed that the court could review the settlement.

The court reviewed the settlement papers, considered the proposed attorney-fee and cost allocation, and participated in conferences and telephone calls with the parties. It also considered financial difficulties that certain defendants might face if the settlement were not completed.

Judge Sarah L. Cave found that the settlement terms appeared fair and reasonable, approved the settlement, and dismissed the action with prejudice without costs except as provided in the agreement. The court retained jurisdiction to enforce the settlement, declared pending motions moot, and directed that the case be closed.

The detailed version

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

Case
Nesbeth v. New York City Management LLC · No. 1:17-cv-08650
Judge
John Koeltl
Date
Apr. 10, 2020

Background

This was a wage-and-hour case under the Fair Labor Standards Act, a federal law governing matters such as employee pay and working time. Nicholas Nesbeth and the defendants submitted a proposed settlement and a joint letter-motion asking the court to approve it. The parties consented to review by United States Magistrate Judge Sarah L. Cave under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 73.

Settlement review

The court reviewed the joint letter-motion and settlement agreement, and it participated in two lengthy conferences and several later telephone conferences with the parties. Under the Second Circuit's decision in Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc., courts review proposed settlements in Fair Labor Standards Act cases. The court stated that such settlements generally receive a strong presumption of fairness. It also considered the possibility that certain defendants could face difficult financial circumstances worsened by the economic downturn resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic if the settlement were not completed.

The court found that all settlement terms, including the allocation of attorney's fees and costs, appeared fair and reasonable under the circumstances and the factors identified in Wolinsky v. Scholastic Inc. The court also explained that it construed the plaintiff's agreement as including an agreement not to knowingly seek future employment with the entities released under the settlement agreement.

Disposition

The court approved the settlement. It dismissed the action with prejudice and without costs except as stated in the settlement agreement. The court retained jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement, ruled that any pending motions were moot, directed the Clerk of Court to mark one docket entry as granted, and ordered the case closed.

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.