Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 26, 2021

Schur v. Strategic Financial Solutions, L.L.C.

Judge
Paul Gardephe
Docket
1:17-cv-00546
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
FlsaEmploymentCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Schur v. Strategic Financial Solutions, Judge Cave approved the FLSA settlement, dismissed the action with prejudice, and retained jurisdiction to enforce it.

Who this affects

Daniel Schur, Strategic Financial Solutions, L.L.C., Strategic Consulting, LLC, Ryan Sasson, and Kim Celic; the settlement was approved and the action was dismissed with prejudice.

What happened

Schur v. Strategic Financial Solutions, L.L.C. was a wage-and-hour case under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The parties asked the court to review and approve their proposed settlement, including attorney-fee and cost provisions.

After reviewing the settlement materials, the court found that all settlement terms appeared fair and reasonable under the circumstances and approved the settlement.

Judge Sarah L. Cave dismissed the action with prejudice and without costs except as provided in the settlement agreement. She retained jurisdiction to enforce the agreement, treated pending motions as moot, and directed the Clerk of Court to close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Schur v. Strategic Financial Solutions, L.L.C. · No. 1:17-cv-00546
Judge
Paul Gardephe
Date
Apr. 26, 2021

Background

Daniel Schur brought this wage-and-hour action against Strategic Financial Solutions, L.L.C., Strategic Consulting, LLC, Ryan Sasson, and Kim Celic under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The parties consented to Magistrate Judge Sarah L. Cave’s jurisdiction for review of their proposed settlement. They submitted a joint motion, a proposed settlement agreement, and supporting materials concerning attorney fees and costs.

Court’s Analysis

The court reviewed the joint motion, settlement agreement, accompanying exhibits, and supplemental fee-and-cost documentation under the standards governing review of Fair Labor Standards Act settlements. It found that all terms of the proposed settlement, including the allocation of attorney fees and costs, appeared fair and reasonable under the totality of the circumstances.

Ruling

The court approved the settlement. It dismissed the action with prejudice and without costs except as provided in the settlement agreement. The court retained jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement, declared any pending motions moot, directed the Clerk of Court to mark the settlement motion as granted, and ordered the case closed.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.