Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Sept. 28, 2021

Douglas v. Lutheran Social Services of Metropolitan New York

Full caption

Douglas v. Lutheran Social Services of Metropolitan New York, Inc. d/b/a Lutheran Social Services of New York, Inc.

Judge
Lorna Schofield
Docket
1:20-cv-10512
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
FlsaFee PetitionCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Douglas v. Lutheran Social Services, Judge Schofield approved a revised wage settlement, granted $14,850 in attorney fees, and ordered a filing.

Who this affects

The plaintiff, the defendant, and plaintiff's counsel are affected by the settlement approval, attorney-fee award, distribution of the remaining settlement, and required filing.

What happened

In Douglas v. Lutheran Social Services of Metropolitan New York, Inc., the plaintiff brought an action under the Fair Labor Standards Act and submitted a settlement agreement for approval.

The court had previously denied approval because the agreement contained an overly broad and vague general release. The plaintiff then filed a revised settlement agreement.

Judge Lorna G. Schofield approved the revised settlement as fair and reasonable, granted the request for $14,850 in attorney fees, directed that the remaining settlement funds be distributed to the plaintiff, and ordered the plaintiff to file a stipulation ending the case by October 1, 2021.

The detailed version

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

Case
Douglas v. Lutheran Social Services of Metropolitan New York · No. 1:20-cv-10512
Judge
Lorna Schofield
Date
Sept. 28, 2021

Background

The plaintiff filed an action against Lutheran Social Services of Metropolitan New York, Inc. d/b/a Lutheran Social Services of New York, Inc. under the Fair Labor Standards Act. On September 20, 2021, the plaintiff filed a joint letter with a settlement agreement and attorney billing details.

On September 23, 2021, the court denied approval of the settlement because its general release provision was overly broad and vague. On September 27, 2021, the plaintiff filed a revised settlement agreement.

Ruling

The court approved the revised settlement agreement as fair and reasonable, considering the nature and scope of the plaintiff's claims and the risks and expenses of additional litigation. The court granted plaintiff's counsel's request for $14,850 in attorney fees and ordered that the remainder of the settlement be distributed to the plaintiff.

The court also ordered the plaintiff to file a stipulation of discontinuance by October 1, 2021.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.