Li v. U.S. Jewelry House, Ltd.
- Ronnie Abrams
- 1:19-cv-06059
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Li v. U.S. Jewelry House, Judge Moses adjourned deadlines and required filings for review of the parties’ proposed Fair Labor Standards Act settlement.
The plaintiffs and defendants in the settled FLSA action, including their counsel regarding any requested fees and costs.
What happened
In Li v. U.S. Jewelry House, the parties told the court that they had settled their dispute, including claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act. They asked to postpone all upcoming deadlines.
The court postponed all pretrial deadlines and the August 6, 2020 status conference indefinitely. It required the parties to submit a joint explanation showing that the settlement was fair and reasonable, the signed settlement agreement, and supporting records for any requested attorneys’ fees and costs.
Judge Barbara Moses also cautioned the parties about confidentiality terms, non-disparagement provisions, one-sided releases, and unsupported or unreasonable fee awards. The settlement had not yet been approved in this order.
The detailed version
- Li v. U.S. Jewelry House, Ltd. · No. 1:19-cv-06059
- Ronnie Abrams
- July 27, 2020
Background
The case was referred to Magistrate Judge Barbara Moses for general pretrial management. In a joint letter dated July 24, 2020, the parties informed the court that they had settled the dispute, including claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), and asked the court to postpone all deadlines indefinitely.
Order
The court ordered that all pretrial deadlines and the status conference scheduled for August 6, 2020, were postponed indefinitely. The court did not approve the settlement in this order.
By August 10, 2020, the parties were required to submit a joint letter explaining why the settlement was fair and reasonable under the standards used for FLSA settlements, a signed copy of the written settlement agreement for placement on the public docket, and authenticated contingency-fee, time, and expense records if the agreement included attorneys’ fees and costs.
Settlement cautions
The court cautioned that confidentiality provisions are rarely appropriate in wage-and-hour settlements. It also warned that a non-disparagement clause should not prevent a plaintiff from making truthful statements about the employment, lawsuit, or settlement.
The court further stated that this district ordinarily refuses to approve one-sided or asymmetrical general releases benefiting remote or unknown corporate affiliates. Mutual releases may be approved when the plaintiff no longer works for the defendant. The court also explained that fairness review includes attorneys’ fees and costs, which must be included in the signed settlement agreement and supported by records and a detailed explanation.
Magistrate-judge consent
If all parties wished Judge Moses to review the settlement under the FLSA settlement-approval procedure, they could consent to her jurisdiction by filing the required form.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.