Gilmore v. The City of New York
- Barbara Moses
- 1:19-cv-06091
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Gilmore v. The City of New York, Judge Moses set deadlines for reviewing the parties’ proposed wage settlement but did not approve it.
The plaintiffs and the City of New York, along with plaintiffs' counsel if they seek attorney fees and costs, were affected by the deadlines and requirements for submitting the proposed FLSA settlement.
What happened
In Gilmore v. The City of New York, the parties told the court that they had settled their dispute, including claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
The case had been referred to Judge Barbara Moses for general pretrial management. The parties proposed February 26, 2021, as the deadline to submit their settlement agreement for court approval.
Judge Moses set earlier deadlines for consenting to her authority to review the settlement and for submitting a joint explanation, the signed agreement, and any records supporting requested attorney fees and costs. She did not approve the settlement in this order.
The detailed version
- Gilmore v. The City of New York · No. 1:19-cv-06091
- Barbara Moses
- Jan. 19, 2021
Background
The action was referred to Barbara Moses, a United States magistrate judge, for general pretrial management. In a joint letter dated January 15, 2021, the parties informed the court that they had settled their dispute, including claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). They proposed February 26, 2021, as the deadline for submitting the proposed settlement agreement for court approval.
Deadlines and required submissions
The court stated that, if the parties wanted Judge Moses to conduct the settlement review with their consent under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), they had to consent by February 12, 2021. By February 18, 2021, the parties had to submit:
- a joint letter explaining why the settlement was fair and reasonable under the factors identified in the court's cited authorities; - a fully signed settlement agreement, which would be placed on the public docket; and - if the plaintiffs' attorneys requested fees and costs, records of counsel's time and expenses and any contingency-fee agreement in the action.
Court's cautions
Judge Moses cautioned that confidentiality provisions would rarely be appropriate in resolving a wage-and-hour lawsuit. She also warned that a non-disparagement clause could not prevent a plaintiff from making truthful statements about the employment, the lawsuit, or the settlement. In addition, she stated that courts in the district ordinarily refuse to approve one-way or overly broad general releases in FLSA settlements.
The court explained that its fairness review would include the reasonableness of attorney fees and costs. Any requested fees and costs had to be included in the written settlement agreement, signed by the parties, supported by properly authenticated time and expense records and any contingency-fee agreement, and accompanied by a detailed explanation. The court identified the degree of success obtained as the most important factor in evaluating a fee award.
Disposition
The order set deadlines and requirements for a later settlement-approval submission. It did not approve or reject the settlement, decide the underlying claims, or award attorney fees. Judge Moses signed the order on January 19, 2021.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.