Jones v. NYC Crane Hoist & Rigging, LLC
- Sarah Cave
- 1:19-cv-10043
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Jones v. NYC Crane Hoist & Rigging, Judge Cave granted an adjournment and required materials supporting review of the Fair Labor Standards Act settlement.
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
- Jones v. NYC Crane Hoist & Rigging, LLC · No. 1:19-cv-10043
- Sarah Cave
- 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.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.