Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 17, 2021

Goutakolis v. Madison Global, LLC

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:19-cv-07260
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
FlsaCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Goutakolis v. Madison Global, Judge Swain approved the FLSA settlement as fair, dismissed the action with prejudice, and allowed restoration if payments failed.

Who this affects

The plaintiff and defendants were affected: the court approved their settlement, dismissed the action with prejudice and without costs to either party, and provided a limited procedure for restoring the case if settlement payments were not completed within 300 days.

What happened

In Goutakolis v. Madison Global, LLC, the parties jointly asked the court to approve their proposed settlement in a Fair Labor Standards Act case. The opinion does not describe the underlying wage-and-hour claims in detail.

The court reviewed the settlement agreement, the parties’ joint letter, a related confidentiality agreement, and the plaintiff’s lawyer’s time records. It concluded that the settlement, including the award for attorneys’ fees and expenses, was fair and reasonable and met the required approval standards.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain dismissed the action with prejudice and without costs to either party. The case could be restored to the calendar if settlement payments were not completed within 300 days, but any request to reopen had to be made before that period expired; the Clerk was directed to close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Goutakolis v. Madison Global, LLC · No. 1:19-cv-07260
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Feb. 17, 2021

Background

The parties jointly submitted a proposed settlement for approval in this Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) case. The opinion does not provide detailed allegations or explain the parties’ underlying wage-and-hour disputes.

Settlement-review standard

The court explained that a district court must scrutinize an FLSA settlement before entering judgment to determine whether it is fair and reasonable. The relevant considerations include the plaintiff’s possible recovery, the burdens and expenses the settlement avoids, litigation risks, whether experienced counsel negotiated at arm’s length, and the possibility of fraud or collusion. The court also noted that private settlements of FLSA claims require approval by the district court or the Department of Labor.

Court’s review and ruling

The court reviewed the parties’ joint letter dated February 11, 2021, the proposed settlement agreement, a Confidentiality Preference Agreement concerning the plaintiff’s non-wage-and-hour claims, and the plaintiff’s counsel’s time records. It found the proposed settlement, including its attorneys’ fees and expense award, fair and reasonable and compliant with the approval requirements described in the opinion.

The court dismissed the action with prejudice and without costs to either party. It stated that the action could be restored to the calendar of the undersigned judge if settlement payments were not completed within 300 days of the order. A party seeking to reopen the matter had to submit a letter application before the 300-day period expired. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-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.