Hidalgo v. Doe Corp.
- Stewart Aaron
- 1:21-cv-02560
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Hidalgo v. Doe Corp., Judge Aaron ordered the parties to explain why their Fair Labor Standards Act settlement is fair and reasonable.
Manuel Hidalgo, the other people he sought to represent, Doe Defendant Corp. doing business as Tavola, the other defendants, and their attorneys.
What happened
Manuel Hidalgo sued Doe Defendant Corp., doing business as Tavola, and others in a case involving claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The case was brought for Hidalgo and others described as similarly situated.
The court was told that the parties had reached a settlement. The parties also agreed that all proceedings could take place before Judge Stewart D. Aaron, but the court did not approve the settlement in this order.
Judge Aaron ordered the parties to file a joint letter or motion by July 14, 2021, addressing whether the settlement was fair and reasonable. They also had to provide information about the claims, defenses, possible damages, negotiations, attorney fees, and the settlement agreement itself.
The detailed version
- Hidalgo v. Doe Corp. · No. 1:21-cv-02560
- Stewart Aaron
- June 28, 2021
Background
Manuel Hidalgo brought this putative collective or class case on behalf of himself and others described in the complaint as similarly situated. The opinion states that the case contains one or more claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act, a federal law governing certain wage and hour rights. The defendants include Doe Defendant Corp., doing business as Tavola, and others.
On June 25, 2021, the court was informed that the parties had reached a settlement. The parties then consented to have all proceedings held before Stewart D. Aaron.
Court’s Order
The court did not decide whether to approve the settlement. Citing the requirements of Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc., 796 F.3d 199 (2d Cir. 2015), the court ordered the parties to file a joint letter or motion addressing whether the settlement was fair and reasonable. The filing was due by July 14, 2021.
The required submission had to discuss the claims and defenses, the defendants’ potential monetary exposure and the basis for calculating it, the strengths and weaknesses of the plaintiff’s case and the defendants’ defenses, reasons for any difference between the potential value of the claims and the settlement amount, the litigation and negotiation process, and other information relevant to the settlement’s reasonableness. It also had to explain the attorney-fee arrangement, attach the retainer agreement, provide the attorneys’ hours and relevant experience, and include a copy of the settlement agreement.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.