Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Sept. 8, 2020

Martinez v. Budo Maintenance Corp.

Judge
Vernon Broderick
Docket
1:19-cv-03302
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
FlsaCivil ProcedureFee Petition
In one sentence

In Martinez v. Budo Maintenance Corp., Judge Broderick directed supplemental settlement information before deciding whether to approve the parties’ Fair Labor Standards Act settlement.

Who this affects

The parties to the proposed settlement, including Orlando Martinez and the plaintiff’s counsel, must provide additional information before the court considers approving the settlement.

What happened

In Martinez v. Budo Maintenance Corp., the parties jointly asked the court to approve their proposed settlement of the plaintiff’s Fair Labor Standards Act claims.

The court said it could not determine whether the settlement was fair and reasonable because the parties did not provide the plaintiff’s maximum potential recovery, time records, or information supporting the requested attorneys’ fees.

Judge Broderick ordered the parties to file a supplemental letter with the missing recovery information and the plaintiff’s counsel’s supporting time records within 21 days. The court did not yet approve or reject the settlement.

The detailed version

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

Case
Martinez v. Budo Maintenance Corp. · No. 1:19-cv-03302
Judge
Vernon Broderick
Date
Sept. 8, 2020

Background

The parties filed a joint motion on November 3, 2019, asking the court to approve their proposed settlement in this Fair Labor Standards Act case. The opinion states that private settlements of Fair Labor Standards Act claims requiring court approval must be shown to be “fair and reasonable” when the Department of Labor has not approved them.

What the Court Considered

The parties submitted a letter describing the proposed agreement. The court identified the plaintiff’s maximum potential recovery on all claims as one factor relevant to settlement approval. The parties did not provide that information. They also did not provide time records or information relating to attorneys’ fees.

Ruling

The court stated that it could not assess whether the settlement was fair and reasonable based on the materials submitted. Judge Vernon S. Broderick ordered the parties to file, within 21 days of the order’s filing, a supplemental letter describing the plaintiff’s maximum potential recovery on all claims and providing the plaintiff’s counsel’s time records supporting the request for attorneys’ fees. The order did not approve or reject the proposed settlement.

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.