Minyety v. Kids Town, Inc.
- Stewart Aaron
- 1:19-cv-05273
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Minyety v. Kids Town, Judge Aaron approved the Fair Labor Standards Act settlement and required disclosure or sealing of attorney-fee information.
The approved settlement affects Juan Minyety and Kids Town, Inc. and the other defendants. The filing directive specifically affects the plaintiff and concerns the public filing or sealing of the attorney-fee portion of the retainer agreement.
What happened
In Minyety v. Kids Town, Inc., the parties submitted a proposed settlement of claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act, a federal law governing certain wage and hour rights.
The court found the settlement fair and reasonable and approved it. The court did not state the settlement’s terms. It directed the plaintiff to file the relevant attorney-fee portion of the retainer agreement without redactions by May 6, 2020, or instead file a request to keep the complete agreement secret.
Judge Stewart D. Aaron stated that the court would enter an order closing the case after that filing or request.
The detailed version
- Minyety v. Kids Town, Inc. · No. 1:19-cv-05273
- Stewart Aaron
- Apr. 29, 2020
Background
Juan Minyety brought claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act. On February 24, 2020, the parties consented to have the magistrate judge decide the matter under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). On April 24, 2020, the parties submitted a proposed settlement agreement and related papers.
Ruling
The court reviewed the proposed settlement and found it fair and reasonable under the standard discussed in Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc. The court approved the settlement. The opinion does not provide the settlement’s financial or other terms.
Because judicial documents are generally presumed to be publicly accessible, the court directed the plaintiff, by May 6, 2020, to file a copy of the retainer agreement with the portion of Paragraph 6 concerning attorney’s fees unredacted. Alternatively, the plaintiff could file a motion asking the court to place the complete retainer agreement under seal. The court stated that it would later enter an order closing the case.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.