Burris v. Columbia University Health Care, Inc.
- Vyskocil
- 1:20-cv-09312
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Burris v. Columbia University Health Care, Judge Vyskocil required review of a settled Fair Labor Standards Act case and ordered disclosures and a fairness hearing.
The order affected Cheryl K. Burris and the defendants—Columbia University Health Care, Inc., New York and Presbyterian Hospital, and TrusStaff Travel Nurses, LLC—by requiring further settlement disclosures, briefing, and a fairness hearing.
What happened
Burris v. Columbia University Health Care concerns claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Cheryl K. Burris asked to dismiss the case voluntarily and without prejudice, but explained that the dismissal resulted from a settlement with the defendants.
The court required the parties to submit the settlement for private review because it waived all claims that were or could have been brought in the case and stated that Burris had no right to recover from the defendants. The proposed settlement also provided for attorney fees and costs equal to about 45% of the total settlement.
Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil ordered the parties to publicly file the settlement, submit a joint letter addressing whether it was fair and reasonable, and appear at a fairness hearing. The order did not approve or reject the settlement.
The detailed version
- Burris v. Columbia University Health Care, Inc. · No. 1:20-cv-09312
- Vyskocil
- Feb. 16, 2021
Background
The complaint asserted claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Plaintiff Cheryl K. Burris filed a notice seeking voluntary dismissal of the action without prejudice. The court initially refused to permit that dismissal without information about whether it resulted from a settlement.
Under the Second Circuit’s decision in Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc., courts review certain Fair Labor Standards Act settlements to determine whether they are fair and reasonable. The court explained that a dismissal labeled “without prejudice” can still require this review if the settlement effectively ends the claims through a waiver.
Settlement Review
Burris told the court that the dismissal resulted from a settlement but argued that review was unnecessary because the dismissal was without prejudice. The court ordered the settlement agreement submitted for private review. After reviewing it, the court determined that Cheeks review was required because the agreement waived all claims that were or could have been alleged in the action and reaffirmed that Burris had no right to recover against any defendant.
Order
The court ordered the parties to publicly file a copy of the settlement agreement by March 17, 2021. It also ordered them to submit a joint letter by that date explaining why the proposed settlement was a fair and reasonable compromise rather than a waiver of statutory rights. The letter must address the plaintiff’s possible recovery, litigation burdens and expenses, litigation risks, the nature of the bargaining, possible fraud or collusion, whether there was a genuine dispute about hours worked or compensation owed, and the attorney-fee request. Because fees and costs were approximately 45% of the total settlement, the parties were specifically ordered to address why that amount was reasonable.
Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil further ordered the parties, including Burris personally, to appear by telephone for a fairness hearing on April 7, 2021. Defendants could attend but were not required to do so. The opinion does not state that the court approved or rejected the settlement.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.