Guaypatin v. Olshan Realty, LLC
- Lewis Liman
- 1:20-cv-02771
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Guaypatin v. Olshan Realty, LLC, Judge Liman directed the plaintiff to submit proposed Fair Labor Standards Act settlement papers; the court did not approve the settlement.
Johanna Guaypatin and Olshan Realty, LLC, the parties to the proposed FLSA settlement.
What happened
Guaypatin v. Olshan Realty, LLC involved a settlement that the parties had reached in principle in a case asserting claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or the settlement’s terms.
The court explained that a stipulated dismissal settling a Fair Labor Standards Act claim with prejudice requires district-court approval. It identified the factors it would use to evaluate the settlement’s fairness, including possible recovery, litigation costs and risks, the parties’ bargaining process, and possible fraud or collusion. It also said it would separately review attorney-fee and cost requests.
Judge Liman directed the plaintiff to submit the proposed settlement and supporting papers by November 2. The order did not approve or reject the settlement.
The detailed version
- Guaypatin v. Olshan Realty, LLC · No. 1:20-cv-02771
- Lewis Liman
- Oct. 1, 2020
Background
The parties reported that they had reached a settlement in principle. The case involved claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The opinion does not state the terms of the proposed settlement or describe the underlying claims.
Court’s analysis
The court explained that, under Second Circuit precedent, a stipulated dismissal settling an FLSA claim with prejudice requires approval by the district court. To evaluate fairness, the court identified five factors: the plaintiff’s possible recovery; the extent to which settlement would avoid the burdens and expenses of proving the claims and defenses; the seriousness of the parties’ litigation risks; whether experienced counsel reached the agreement through arm’s-length bargaining; and the possibility of fraud or collusion.
The court also stated that it would separately evaluate the reasonableness of any request for attorney’s fees and costs. It noted that a proper fee request includes contemporaneous billing records showing, for each attorney, the date, hours worked, and nature of the work.
Disposition
The court directed the plaintiff to submit the proposed settlement and supporting papers by November 2. The order did not approve or reject the settlement and did not enter a dismissal.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.