Baten Ramirez v. AAM Restaurant LLC
- Vernon Broderick
- 1:20-cv-04700
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Baten Ramirez v. AAM Restaurant LLC, Judge Broderick ordered the parties to submit their FLSA settlement for fairness review and adjourned the status conference.
The named plaintiffs and defendants in the FLSA case were required to submit their settlement terms and supporting explanation to the court; any requested attorney-fee award also required supporting billing records.
What happened
In Baten Ramirez v. AAM Restaurant LLC, the parties told the court they had reached a settlement in a case under the Fair Labor Standards Act, a federal law governing certain employment practices.
The court explained that the parties could not privately settle the claims with final effect without approval from the court or the Department of Labor. The court therefore required them to submit the settlement terms and explain why the agreement was fair and reasonable.
Judge Broderick ordered the parties to provide the settlement terms and a joint letter within 30 days. If the agreement included attorney-fee payments, they also had to provide records supporting those fees. The court adjourned the status conference scheduled for June 10, 2021; the opinion did not approve the settlement.
The detailed version
- Baten Ramirez v. AAM Restaurant LLC · No. 1:20-cv-04700
- Vernon Broderick
- May 13, 2021
Background
The court was told that the parties had reached a settlement in this Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) case. The opinion does not state the settlement amount or describe the specific disputed claims.
Settlement review
The court explained that the parties could not privately settle FLSA claims with final effect unless the district court or the Department of Labor approved the settlement. The court must determine whether the agreement is fair and reasonable by considering the total circumstances, including the plaintiffs’ possible recovery, the burdens and expenses the settlement would avoid, the litigation risks, whether experienced counsel negotiated at arm’s length, and the possibility of fraud or collusion.
When a settlement includes attorney’s fees, the court must separately assess whether the fees are reasonable. Supporting evidence must provide a factual basis for the requested award, including contemporaneous billing records showing each attorney’s date of work, hours, and work performed.
Order
The court ordered the parties to submit the settlement terms within 30 days. It also ordered them to submit a joint letter of no more than five pages explaining why the settlement was a fair and reasonable compromise, including information about the five review factors. If the agreement included attorney’s fees, the parties had to submit supporting evidence. The court adjourned the status conference scheduled for June 10, 2021. The opinion required further submissions and did not approve the settlement.
Judge Vernon S. Broderick signed the order.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.