Burris v. Columbia University Health Care, Inc.
- Vyskocil
- 1:20-cv-09312
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Burris v. Columbia University Health Care, Inc., Judge Vyskocil approved the parties’ fair settlement under federal wage law and dismissed the case with prejudice.
The settlement resolved Cheryl K. Burris’s claims against Columbia University Health Care, Inc., and the other defendants named in the case.
What happened
In Burris v. Columbia University Health Care, Inc., the parties reached a settlement of the plaintiff’s claims. The plaintiff had initially sought to dismiss the case without court review, but the court decided review was needed because the settlement waived her claims.
The court reviewed the settlement documents for fairness under the Fair Labor Standards Act, a federal wage-and-hour law, and Second Circuit law. It found the settlement terms fair and reasonable. The court did not express an opinion about whether the rates charged by the plaintiff’s attorney were reasonable.
Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil approved the settlement and ordered the case dismissed with prejudice. The clerk was directed to terminate pending motions, adjourn remaining dates, and close the case.
The detailed version
- Burris v. Columbia University Health Care, Inc. · No. 1:20-cv-09312
- Vyskocil
- Apr. 21, 2021
Background
The plaintiff, Cheryl K. Burris, brought claims against Columbia University Health Care, Inc., and other defendants. The parties reached a settlement. The plaintiff initially sought to dismiss the case without court review of the settlement.
Settlement Review
Because the settlement purported to waive the plaintiff’s claims, the court determined that review was appropriate under Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House and applicable Second Circuit law. The plaintiff then submitted a letter and supporting documents concerning the settlement.
The court reviewed the documents for fairness under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), a federal wage-and-hour statute, and Second Circuit law. It concluded that the settlement’s terms were fair and reasonable. The court specifically stated that its approval did not express an opinion about the reasonableness of the rates charged by the plaintiff’s attorney.
Disposition
The court approved the settlement and ordered that the case be dismissed with prejudice. It also directed the clerk to terminate all pending motions, adjourn any remaining dates, and close the case.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.