De Jesus Prudente v. Brother's Bakery Cafe Corp.
- Ronnie Abrams
- 1:21-cv-00594
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In De Jesus Prudente v. Brother’s Bakery Cafe Corp., Judge Abrams directed the parties to address their reported Fair Labor Standards Act settlement.
The plaintiff and defendants in the FLSA case, whose reported settlement still required one of the court-directed next steps.
What happened
In De Jesus Prudente v. Brother’s Bakery Cafe Corp., the court reported that court-ordered mediation in this wage-and-hour case had succeeded and that the parties had reached agreement on all issues.
The parties had until May 17, 2021, to consent to a magistrate judge handling the rest of the case, file a voluntary dismissal without prejudice, or ask the court to approve the settlement as fair and reasonable with supporting materials.
Judge Ronnie Abrams did not approve the settlement or enter a final dismissal in this order. She advised that materials used to evaluate fairness would be public and identified settlement terms the court would not approve, including overly broad claim waivers and certain bans on negative statements about the defendants.
The detailed version
- De Jesus Prudente v. Brother's Bakery Cafe Corp. · No. 1:21-cv-00594
- Ronnie Abrams
- Apr. 15, 2021
Background
Adan De Jesus Prudente brought this Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) case against Brother’s Bakery Cafe Corp. and other defendants. The opinion states that court-ordered mediation was successful and that the parties had reached an agreement on all issues.
Order
The court directed the parties to take one of three actions by May 17, 2021:
- Voluntarily consent to have Magistrate Judge Aaron conduct all further proceedings.
- File a stipulation or notice of voluntary dismissal without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
- 3. File a joint letter explaining why the settlement was fair and reasonable, together with supporting materials, including contemporaneous records of attorney billing and costs covered by the settlement.
The court noted that documents it relied on to decide whether the settlement was fair would be filed publicly because judicial documents are generally presumed to be accessible to the public.
The court also advised that it would not approve settlement agreements in which the plaintiff broadly waived practically any possible claim against the defendants, including unrelated or unknown claims. It also would not approve an agreement barring the plaintiff from making any negative statement about the defendants unless the agreement allowed truthful statements about the plaintiff’s experience litigating the case.
Disposition
The order set procedures for completing or seeking approval of the reported settlement. It did not itself approve the settlement, enter judgment, or dismiss the case. Judge Ronnie Abrams signed the order on April 15, 2021.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.