Chang v. Philips Bryant Park LLC.
- Laura Swain
- 1:17-cv-08816
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 6
In Chang v. Philips Bryant Park LLC, Judge Swain approved a $975,000 settlement, awards, and attorneys’ fees, then dismissed the case with prejudice.
The settlement affected the certified class and Fair Labor Standards Act collective members who did not timely opt out, the named plaintiffs Andrew Chang and Ryan Santos, class counsel, the settlement administrator, and the defendants.
What happened
In Chang v. Philips Bryant Park LLC, Andrew Chang and Ryan Santos brought claims for themselves and other plaintiffs under the Fair Labor Standards Act and a class-action rule. The parties reached a $975,000 settlement, and the defendants did not oppose the requested approvals.
The court held a fairness hearing, and no class member objected. It found that the notices and settlement process were adequate and that the settlement was fair, reasonable, and sufficient under the circumstances.
Judge Swain finally approved the settlement, certified the settlement class and Fair Labor Standards Act collective, approved service awards and a payment to Chang, awarded attorneys’ fees and expenses, and dismissed the case with prejudice.
The detailed version
- Chang v. Philips Bryant Park LLC. · No. 1:17-cv-08816
- Laura Swain
- June 5, 2020
Background
Andrew Chang and Ryan Santos sued Philips Bryant Park LLC, doing business as Bryant Park Hotel, and Phil Columbo and Michael Strauss. They brought claims on behalf of themselves, a class under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23, and a collective group under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The opinion does not describe the underlying alleged violations in detail.
The parties entered into a settlement totaling $975,000 on January 10, 2019. The court had preliminarily approved the settlement, conditionally certified the settlement class, appointed class counsel and a settlement administrator, and authorized notice. Plaintiffs later moved for final approval of the class settlement and Fair Labor Standards Act settlement, approval of service awards, and approval of attorneys’ fees and expense reimbursement. The motions were unopposed. The court held a fairness hearing on May 21, 2020, and no class member objected. The parties filed an addendum to the settlement on June 5, 2020.
Court’s Analysis
The court found that the notice provided to class and collective members was the best notice reasonably available under the circumstances and satisfied Rule 23, the Fair Labor Standards Act, and due process. It confirmed the class certification for settlement purposes and certified the Fair Labor Standards Act collective.
The court found that the settlement was procedurally fair because it resulted from arm’s-length negotiations after counsel investigated the legal and factual issues. It also found the settlement substantively fair, considering factors including the likely complexity, expense, duration, and risks of continued litigation; the stage of the case and completed discovery; the lack of objections; and the settlement amount’s relationship to the possible recovery and litigation risks. The court approved the payment-allocation plan as fair, reasonable, and adequate.
The settlement resolved disputed claims without the defendants admitting any violation of law or liability. The order therefore approved a compromise rather than deciding whether the defendants were liable on the underlying claims.
Rulings
Judge Laura Taylor Swain granted the plaintiffs’ unopposed motion for certification of the settlement class, final approval of the class-action settlement, and approval of the Fair Labor Standards Act settlement. The court confirmed Andrew Chang and Ryan Santos as class representatives and confirmed C.K. Lee of Lee Litigation Group PLLC as class counsel.
The court granted the motion for attorneys’ fees and awarded class counsel $325,000 in fees and $4,903.67 for litigation expenses, to be paid from the settlement fund. It approved service awards of $1,000 each for Chang and Santos, a $20,000 release payment to Chang, and $30,000 in fees for the settlement administrator, all to be paid from the settlement fund as provided by the settlement.
The court fully and finally dismissed the matter and litigation in its entirety and with prejudice. It stated that neither party was a prevailing party and retained jurisdiction to enforce the settlement and oversee distribution of the settlement funds.
Read the full 6-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.