Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 21, 2020

Eng v. China Ting Apparel, LLC

Judge
Katharine Parker
Docket
1:20-cv-01147
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
FlsaEmploymentCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Eng v. China Ting Apparel, Judge Parker approved the settlement, discontinued the action with prejudice and without costs, and closed the case.

Who this affects

Jenny Eng and China Ting Apparel, LLC and the other defendants; the court-approved settlement ends the action, subject to the stated 30-day restoration procedure if the written settlement documentation is not completed.

What happened

In Eng v. China Ting Apparel, Jenny Eng brought claims under federal and New York wage and discrimination laws. The parties reached an agreement in principle and asked the court to approve their proposed settlement.

The court reviewed the settlement and found it fair, reasonable, and adequate, including compensation for Eng’s claims and her lawyer’s fees. The court noted that the settlement terms were not included in the order and that it did not retain authority to enforce the agreement.

Judge Katharine H. Parker approved the settlement, discontinued the action with prejudice and without costs, and directed the clerk to close the case. Eng could ask to restore the case within 30 days if written settlement documents were not completed.

The detailed version

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

Case
Eng v. China Ting Apparel, LLC · No. 1:20-cv-01147
Judge
Katharine Parker
Date
Aug. 21, 2020

Background

Jenny Eng brought claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act, New York Labor Law, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the New York State Human Rights Law, and the New York City Human Rights Law. The parties consented to the court’s authority to decide the matter and, after reaching an agreement in principle, submitted a proposed settlement for approval.

Because the case included claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act, the court reviewed the settlement for fairness. The parties also submitted a letter explaining why they believed the agreement was fair, reasonable, and adequate. The court considered those submissions, the settlement’s terms, the circumstances of the case, and the fact that the agreement was reached through arm’s-length mediation using the court’s mediation program.

Rulings

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

The order did not include or incorporate the settlement’s terms. It also did not state that the court would retain authority to enforce the settlement, and the court made no independent decision to retain that authority.

The court ordered that the action be discontinued with prejudice and without costs. It allowed Eng, within 30 days of the order, to apply by letter to restore the action to the active calendar if any part of the written settlement documentation was not completed. Judge Katharine H. Parker also directed the clerk to close the case.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-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.