San Juan Tolentino v. Hermes B NY LLC
- Gregory Woods
- 1:21-cv-00198
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In San Juan Tolentino v. Hermes B NY LLC, Judge Woods directed settlement parties on how to dismiss Fair Labor Standards Act claims.
The plaintiffs and defendants who reported reaching a settlement involving Fair Labor Standards Act claims, including their attorneys, were required to follow the court’s procedures for seeking dismissal or submitting a stipulation.
What happened
In San Juan Tolentino v. Hermes B NY LLC, the parties told the court they had reached a settlement involving claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
The court explained that the parties could ask for approval to dismiss those claims permanently, or submit an agreement dismissing them without prejudice, meaning they would not be permanently barred from bringing them again. The order set filing deadlines and required additional information for court approval.
Judge Gregory H. Woods did not dismiss the case or approve the settlement in this order. Instead, he ordered the parties to follow one of the stated procedures, including discussing whether to proceed before the assigned magistrate judge and addressing the settlement’s fairness, attorney’s fees, and confidentiality terms if required.
The detailed version
- San Juan Tolentino v. Hermes B NY LLC · No. 1:21-cv-00198
- Gregory Woods
- May 23, 2021
Background
The court stated that the parties had reported reaching a settlement. The settlement included claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), a federal law governing certain wage and hour rights.
Court’s instructions
The court described two possible procedures:
Dismissal with prejudice after court approval
The court explained that the parties could seek dismissal of the FLSA claims with prejudice, meaning the claims would be permanently dismissed. Under the Second Circuit’s decision in Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc., the parties could not use the ordinary voluntary-dismissal procedure to dismiss FLSA claims with prejudice. They instead had to seek the court’s approval under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2).
First, the parties were ordered to discuss whether they would consent to having all further proceedings conducted by the assigned magistrate judge. If both sides consented, they had to file the required completed consent form by June 7, 2021. If either side did not consent, the parties had to file a joint letter by that date stating that they did not consent, without identifying which party withheld consent. The court stated that withholding consent would not have negative consequences.
If the parties did not consent to proceed before the magistrate judge, they had to file a joint motion by June 14, 2021, explaining why the settlement was fair and should be approved. The motion had to address the factors identified in Wolinsky v. Scholastic Inc. and include the settlement agreement. The court also stated that it would not approve settlement agreements containing confidentiality provisions and would not allow settlement-related documents to be filed under seal without a specific showing overcoming the presumption that judicial documents are publicly accessible.
If the settlement included attorney’s fees, the parties also had to address whether the fees were reasonable under the framework described in Goldberger v. Integrated Resources, Inc. Plaintiffs’ attorneys had to attach detailed time records for the court’s review.
Dismissal without prejudice
The court also said it would accept a stipulation—a written agreement filed by the parties—dismissing the FLSA claims without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A). The parties choosing this option had to submit the stipulation by June 7, 2021.
Disposition
The court issued instructions for completing the settlement-related dismissal process. It did not approve the settlement or enter a dismissal in this order. Judge Gregory H. Woods ordered the parties to proceed under one of the two described alternatives.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.