Chevalier v. Staffpro, Inc.
- Ronnie Abrams
- 1:20-cv-07006
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Chevalier v. Staffpro, Inc., Judge Abrams ordered the parties to address their reported settlement by January 15, 2021.
Nathaneal Chevalier and Staffpro, Inc. and the other defendants named in the case caption.
What happened
In Chevalier v. Staffpro, Inc., the court was told that the Fair Labor Standards Act case had settled. The opinion does not describe the settlement’s terms or say that the court had approved it.
The parties had to choose one of three options by January 15, 2021: consent to a magistrate judge handling the rest of the case, file a voluntary dismissal without prejudice, or ask the court to review whether the settlement was fair and reasonable.
Judge Ronnie Abrams also warned that materials used for settlement approval would generally be placed on the public docket and identified settlement provisions the court would not approve, including overly broad claim waivers and bans on negative statements without an exception for truthful statements about the litigation.
The detailed version
- Chevalier v. Staffpro, Inc. · No. 1:20-cv-07006
- Ronnie Abrams
- Dec. 11, 2020
Background
The court stated that it had been informed that this Fair Labor Standards Act case had settled. The opinion does not provide the settlement amount, the settlement terms, or a final approval of the settlement.
Order
The court ordered the parties, no later than January 15, 2021, to take one of three actions:
- Consent to conducting all further proceedings before Magistrate Judge Moses by completing the required consent form. The court noted that choosing not to proceed before Judge Moses would not cause adverse substantive consequences.
- Submit a stipulation or notice of voluntary dismissal without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
- 3. Submit a joint letter explaining why the settlement was fair and reasonable, along with supporting materials, including contemporaneous billing records for attorney fees and costs provided for in the settlement.
Settlement-Approval Guidance
The court advised that materials on which it relied in deciding whether the settlement was fair would be placed on the public docket because judicial documents are generally presumed to be publicly accessible. It also stated that it would not approve settlement agreements in which the plaintiff broadly waived practically any possible claim against the defendants, including unrelated or unknown claims. The court likewise would not approve an agreement barring the plaintiff from making any negative statement about the defendants unless the agreement included an exception for truthful statements about the plaintiff’s experience litigating the case.
Disposition and Classification
The court entered an order addressing the next steps after the reported settlement. It did not decide the merits of the Fair Labor Standards Act claims, approve the settlement, dismiss the case, or state which of the three options the parties ultimately chose. This is a procedural order concerning settlement administration.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.