Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 12, 2021

Polanco v. York Food Corp.

Judge
Barbara Moses
Docket
1:19-cv-08815
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
FlsaEmploymentCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Polanco v. York Food Corp., Judge Moses adjourned the trial proceedings and ordered Fair Labor Standards Act settlement materials by March 5, 2021.

Who this affects

Viktoryia Polanco and York Food Corp. and the other defendants were affected by the postponement of the scheduled proceedings and the deadline and requirements for seeking approval of their settlement.

What happened

In Polanco v. York Food Corp., 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. They asked for more time to seek court approval of their settlement.

The court adjourned indefinitely the February 18 trial-planning conference and the April 5 bench trial. It ordered the parties to submit by March 5 a joint explanation of why the settlement was fair and reasonable, the signed written settlement agreement, and supporting records for any requested attorneys’ fees and costs.

Judge Barbara Moses did not approve the settlement in this order. She cautioned that confidentiality provisions, certain non-disparagement provisions, and one-sided or overly broad releases may prevent approval, and said any fee request must be supported and explained. The clerk was directed to close the letter-motion requesting the schedule changes.

The detailed version

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

Case
Polanco v. York Food Corp. · No. 1:19-cv-08815
Judge
Barbara Moses
Date
Feb. 12, 2021

Background

The parties reported that they had settled their dispute, including claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). They asked the court to adjourn the trial-planning conference scheduled for February 18, 2021, and to give them until March 5, 2021, to seek approval of the settlement.

Court’s orders

The court ordered that the trial-planning conference and the bench trial scheduled to begin on April 5, 2021, were “adjourned sine die,” meaning postponed indefinitely. The court also ordered the parties to submit no later than March 5, 2021:

  1. A joint letter explaining why the settlement was fair and reasonable under the factors identified 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, along with time and expense records needed to support an award of attorneys’ fees and costs.

The court stated that the parties should not expect another extension without exceptionally compelling circumstances because the district judge had already granted multiple extensions for submitting the settlement-approval motion.

Settlement-review cautions

The court cautioned that confidentiality provisions are rarely appropriate in resolving FLSA wage-and-hour lawsuits. It also warned that a non-disparagement clause may be unacceptable if it prevents a plaintiff from making truthful statements about the plaintiff’s employment, the lawsuit, or the settlement. In addition, the court stated that courts in the district ordinarily refuse to approve FLSA settlements containing one-sided or overly broad general releases.

The court explained that its fairness review includes the reasonableness of attorneys’ fees and costs. Any proposed fee and cost award had to be included in the written settlement agreement, signed by the parties, supported by properly authenticated records, and accompanied by a detailed explanation. The court identified the degree of success obtained as the most important factor in assessing a fee award.

Disposition

The court adjourned the scheduled proceedings indefinitely, ordered the settlement-approval materials by March 5, 2021, and directed the clerk to close the letter-motion at Docket No. 37. This order did not approve or reject the settlement.

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.