Nedd v. Sound Design Alarm Inc.
- Vyskocil
- 1:19-cv-08229
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Nedd v. Sound Design Alarm, Judge Vyskocil approved a fair Fair Labor Standards Act settlement and dismissed the case with prejudice.
Nekeshon Nedd, Sound Design Alarm Inc., and Richard Pappas. The court approved their settlement and dismissed the case with prejudice, but the opinion does not describe the settlement’s specific terms.
What happened
Nedd v. Sound Design Alarm Inc. was a Fair Labor Standards Act case in which the plaintiff asked the court to approve a proposed settlement.
The court had previously denied the request without prejudice because the submission lacked enough information for meaningful review. The plaintiff then filed a more detailed request.
Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil found the settlement fair and reasonable, approved it, and ordered the case dismissed with prejudice. She did not specifically rule on whether the plaintiff’s attorney’s billing rates were reasonable.
The detailed version
- Nedd v. Sound Design Alarm Inc. · No. 1:19-cv-08229
- Vyskocil
- Feb. 19, 2021
Background
Nekeshon Nedd brought this Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) case against Sound Design Alarm Inc. and Richard Pappas. On January 27, 2021, Nedd filed a signed proposed settlement agreement and asked the court to approve it. The court denied that request without prejudice on January 29 because the submission did not provide enough information for meaningful review.
On February 18, Nedd filed a more detailed letter requesting approval of the settlement.
Ruling
The court reviewed the proposed settlement for fairness under the FLSA and applicable Second Circuit law. It concluded that the settlement terms were fair and reasonable and approved the settlement. The court stated that it was not specifically deciding whether the rates charged by Nedd’s attorney were reasonable.
The court ordered that the case be dismissed with prejudice, directed the Clerk of Court to terminate all pending motions and adjourn any remaining dates, and ordered the case closed.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.