Dolores v. Titan Construction Services LLC
- Barbara Moses
- 1:19-cv-11056
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Dolores v. Titan Construction Services LLC, Judge Moses vacated deadlines and required settlement materials for review of the parties’ Fair Labor Standards Act settlement.
The plaintiffs and defendants in the settled wage-and-hour case, including their lawyers if fees or costs are requested.
What happened
Jose Alvaro Dolores and the other plaintiffs settled their dispute with Titan Construction Services LLC and the other defendants, including claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
The court vacated all previously set deadlines and ordered the parties to submit a joint fairness letter, their signed settlement agreement, and materials supporting any requested lawyer fees and costs.
Judge Moses did not approve the settlement in this order; she explained that the court would review its fairness, confidentiality and non-disparagement terms, releases, and fee provisions after the required materials were filed.
The detailed version
- Dolores v. Titan Construction Services LLC · No. 1:19-cv-11056
- Barbara Moses
- Dec. 3, 2020
Background
The parties told the court that they had settled their dispute, including claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act, a federal wage-and-hour law. The parties later consented to Judge Moses’s authority over the remaining proceedings.
Court’s Orders
The court vacated all deadlines previously set in the case. It ordered the parties to submit by December 22, 2020: (1) a joint letter explaining why the settlement is fair and reasonable under the factors used in Wolinsky v. Scholastic Inc.; (2) a written settlement agreement signed by all parties, which would be placed on the public docket; and (3) any contingency-fee agreement and time and expense records needed to support a request for attorneys’ fees and costs.
Settlement Terms and Fees
The court cautioned that confidentiality provisions are rarely appropriate in wage-and-hour settlements because of the policies underlying the Fair Labor Standards Act. It gave the same warning about non-disparagement provisions that would prevent a plaintiff from making truthful statements about the employment, lawsuit, or settlement. The court also stated that it ordinarily will not approve one-way or overly broad general releases in Fair Labor Standards Act settlements.
The court explained that its fairness review includes the reasonableness of attorneys’ fees and costs. Any proposed fee and cost award must be included in the written settlement agreement, signed by the parties, supported by properly authenticated records, and explained in detail. The court identified the degree of success obtained as the most important factor in evaluating a fee award.
Disposition
The order vacated the existing deadlines and required the settlement materials. It did not state that 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.