Small v. Stellar Management LTD
- Stewart Aaron
- 1:20-cv-02540
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Small v. Stellar Management LTD, Judge Aaron reopened a settled Fair Labor Standards Act case and required a filing addressing settlement fairness.
Jonathan Small, Stellar Management LTD, the other defendants, and their attorneys were required to provide information for court review of the reported settlement.
What happened
Small v. Stellar Management LTD involves one or more claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The parties told the court that they had reached a settlement.
The parties later agreed that all proceedings could be handled by Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron. The opinion does not describe the claims, defenses, or settlement amount.
Judge Aaron ordered the Clerk to reopen the case and required the parties to file a joint letter or motion about whether the settlement is fair and reasonable. The filing was due October 20, 2020, and had to include information about the case, negotiations, attorney fees, hours worked, the attorneys’ experience, and the settlement agreement.
The detailed version
- Small v. Stellar Management LTD · No. 1:20-cv-02540
- Stewart Aaron
- Oct. 6, 2020
Background
Jonathan Small sued Stellar Management LTD and other defendants in a case containing one or more claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act. On September 18, 2020, the parties informed the court that they had reached a settlement. They later consented to have all proceedings conducted before Stewart D. Aaron.
Court’s Action
The court cited the requirements of Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc., 796 F.3d 199 (2d Cir. 2015), and required the parties to submit a joint letter or motion addressing whether their settlement was fair and reasonable. The court requested that the filing discuss the claims and defenses, the defendants’ possible financial exposure and the basis for calculating it, the strengths and weaknesses of the plaintiff’s case and the defendants’ defenses, reasons for any difference between the potential value of the claims and the settlement amount, the litigation and negotiation process, and any other relevant issues, including whether the defendants could pay a judgment if the case went to trial.
The court also required information about the attorney-fee arrangement, a copy of the retainer agreement, the attorneys’ actual hours worked, and the attorneys’ relevant experience. The parties also had to attach the settlement agreement. The court requested that the Clerk of Court reopen the case and set October 20, 2020, as the filing deadline. The opinion does not state whether the court approved or rejected the settlement.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.