Schur v. Strategic Financial Solutions, L.L.C.
- Paul Gardephe
- 1:17-cv-00546
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Schur v. Strategic Financial Solutions, Judge Cave required billing and cost records before reviewing the proposed wage-and-hour settlement.
The order directly affected Daniel Schur, the defendants, and the plaintiff’s counsel by requiring additional documentation before the court could complete its review of the proposed settlement’s attorney fees and costs.
What happened
Schur v. Strategic Financial Solutions is a wage-and-hour case under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The parties asked the court to approve their proposed settlement, which included attorney fees and costs for the plaintiff’s counsel.
The court said it could not complete its review because the parties had not provided billing records and cost documents supporting the requested fees and costs. The order did not approve or reject the proposed settlement.
Judge Sarah L. Cave ordered the plaintiff’s counsel to submit the required records by April 16, 2021, so the court could assess whether the requested fees and costs were reasonable.
The detailed version
- Schur v. Strategic Financial Solutions, L.L.C. · No. 1:17-cv-00546
- Paul Gardephe
- Apr. 9, 2021
Background
Daniel Schur brought this wage-and-hour case under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) against Strategic Financial Solutions, L.L.C., Strategic Consulting, LLC, Ryan Sasson, and Kim Celic. The parties consented to Sarah L. Cave’s jurisdiction as a United States magistrate judge for review of their proposed settlement. They submitted a joint letter-motion and proposed settlement agreement for approval under the requirement that courts review FLSA settlements.
Attorney fees and costs
The proposed settlement included an allocation of attorney fees and costs to the plaintiff’s counsel. The court explained that, when an FLSA settlement includes attorney fees, the court must assess whether the fees are reasonable. In the Second Circuit, counsel must provide contemporaneous billing records showing, for each attorney, the date, hours spent, and work performed, along with documentation supporting costs.
Order
The parties had not submitted the billing records or cost documentation needed for the court’s review. Accordingly, the court ordered the plaintiff’s counsel to submit appropriate billing records and costs documentation corresponding to the requested fees and costs by April 16, 2021. The opinion does not state that the proposed settlement was approved or rejected.
Disposition
The order required additional documentation; it did not state that the settlement was granted, denied, or dismissed.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.