Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 13, 2020

Jones v. NYC Crane Hoist & Rigging, LLC

Judge
Sarah Cave
Docket
1:19-cv-10043
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
FlsaCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Jones v. NYC Crane Hoist & Rigging, Judge Cave granted an adjournment and required materials supporting review of the Fair Labor Standards Act settlement.

Who this affects

The order affected Seymour Jones, Kenneth Rose, NYC Crane Hoist & Rigging, LLC, and Thomas Auringer by postponing case deadlines and requiring a joint filing about their proposed settlement.

What happened

Jones v. NYC Crane Hoist & Rigging, LLC involved Seymour Jones and Kenneth Rose against NYC Crane Hoist & Rigging, LLC and Thomas Auringer. The parties told the court they had agreed to settle claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The court granted the parties’ request to postpone all outstanding deadlines indefinitely and postponed the scheduled telephone conference. It required the parties to file a joint letter-motion about whether their settlement was fair and reasonable.

Judge Sarah L. Cave ordered the parties to file that material by October 27, 2020. The submission had to discuss the claims, defenses, possible damages, the strengths and weaknesses of the case, the settlement negotiations, the attorneys’ fees, any fee agreement, and the settlement agreement itself.

The detailed version

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

Case
Jones v. NYC Crane Hoist & Rigging, LLC · No. 1:19-cv-10043
Judge
Sarah Cave
Date
Oct. 13, 2020

Background

The plaintiffs are Seymour Jones and Kenneth Rose. The defendants are NYC Crane Hoist & Rigging, LLC and Thomas Auringer. The opinion states that the case includes one or more claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The parties applied to postpone all outstanding deadlines because they had agreed to settle.

Court’s Order

The court granted the application to adjourn all outstanding deadlines indefinitely. It also postponed indefinitely the telephone conference that had been scheduled for October 28, 2020.

Because the case included Fair Labor Standards Act claims, the court required the parties to file a joint letter-motion addressing whether their settlement was fair and reasonable. The order required that filing by October 27, 2020.

The joint submission had to address the claims and defenses, the defendants’ potential monetary exposure and the basis for calculating it, the strengths and weaknesses of the plaintiffs’ case and the defendants’ defenses, and any reasons for a difference between the possible value of the claims and the settlement amount. It also had to describe the litigation and negotiation process and any other relevant issue, including whether a judgment would be collectible if the case went to trial.

The parties also had to explain their attorney-fee arrangement, attach any retainer agreement, provide information about the attorneys’ fees actually spent, and attach the settlement agreement. The order required this information for the court’s review; it did not state that the court approved the settlement.

Disposition

Judge Sarah L. Cave granted the request to postpone the deadlines and scheduled conference, and ordered the parties to submit the required settlement materials. The opinion does not decide the underlying Fair Labor Standards Act claims.

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.