Rigano v. Piccola Cucina Group
- Lewis Liman
- 1:21-cv-00724
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Rigano v. Piccola Cucina Group, Judge Liman ordered the parties to submit their Fair Labor Standards Act settlement for fairness review, with supporting explanations and fee documentation.
The parties and their attorneys are affected because they must submit the proposed settlement, explain its fairness, and provide supporting documentation for any proposed attorney-fee award.
What happened
Rigano v. Piccola Cucina Group concerns a case brought under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law. The parties told the court that they had reached a settlement in principle.
The court ordered the parties to submit the settlement agreement and a joint letter by June 28, 2021. The letter must explain why the proposed settlement is fair and reasonable, including discussion of confidentiality, non-disparagement terms, releases, incentive payments, and attorney fees, if applicable.
Judge Lewis J. Liman did not approve or reject the settlement in this order. He required adequate documentation supporting any proposed attorney-fee award, including normally detailed time records, and warned that insufficient documentation could lead the court to reject the fee award.
The detailed version
- Rigano v. Piccola Cucina Group · No. 1:21-cv-00724
- Lewis Liman
- June 14, 2021
Background
The plaintiff brought the case individually and on behalf of other similarly situated persons. The opinion states that the claims arise under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and the New York Labor Law. The parties informed the court that they had reached a settlement in principle, but the opinion does not describe the settlement’s terms.
Court’s analysis
The court explained that, under then-current Second Circuit law, settlements of FLSA claims—including proposed attorney-fee awards—must be reviewed to ensure that they are fair. The court directed the parties to address the fairness factors identified in Wolinsky v. Scholastic, Inc. The required submission must also address any confidentiality provisions, non-disparagement provisions, releases, incentive payments to the plaintiff, and attorney-fee award.
The court emphasized that stating only the proportion of the requested attorney fee compared with the total settlement amount is not enough. The parties must provide adequate documentation supporting fees and costs, normally including contemporaneous time records showing each attorney’s date of work, hours spent, and the nature of the work. The court warned that inadequate documentation could result in rejection of the proposed fee award.
Order and current status
The court ordered the parties to submit the settlement agreement and a joint explanatory letter by June 28, 2021. This order did not approve or reject the settlement itself, and it did not decide the underlying labor-law claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.