Martinez v. JVA Industries Inc.
- James Cott
- 1:20-cv-07977
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Martinez v. JVA Industries Inc., Judge Liman required settlement details and a hearing before reviewing Jorge Quispe’s proposed Fair Labor Standards Act dismissal.
The order affected the parties to the FLSA case, particularly Jorge Quispe, Joseph Alfano, JVA Industries Inc., and the parties’ attorneys. It required them to provide settlement and fee information and attend a settlement-approval hearing.
What happened
In Grevil Martinez et al. v. JVA Industries Inc. et al., the parties filed an agreement voluntarily dismissing, with prejudice, the claims of Fair Labor Standards Act opt-in plaintiff Jorge Quispe against Joseph Alfano and JVA Industries Inc. The filing appeared to be connected to a proposed settlement.
The court ordered the parties to submit a joint letter by January 20, 2022, explaining why the proposed settlement was fair and reasonable. The letter must address confidentiality, non-disparagement terms, releases, and any attorney-fee request with supporting records. The court also scheduled a telephone settlement-approval hearing for January 27, 2022, and directed Jorge Quispe to attend, with an interpreter if necessary.
Judge Lewis J. Liman explained that settlements in Fair Labor Standards Act cases, including proposed attorney-fee awards, must be reviewed for fairness. The opinion does not state that the court approved the settlement or entered the proposed dismissal.
The detailed version
- Martinez v. JVA Industries Inc. · No. 1:20-cv-07977
- James Cott
- Dec. 27, 2021
Background
The parties filed a stipulation of voluntary dismissal concerning the claims of Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) opt-in plaintiff Jorge Quispe against defendants Joseph Alfano and JVA Industries Inc. The stipulation called for dismissal with prejudice, and the court said the dismissal was presumably part of a proposed settlement.
Court’s analysis
The court explained that, under Second Circuit law, an FLSA settlement—including any proposed award of attorney’s fees—must be reviewed to ensure that it is fair. The court directed the parties to explain the proposed settlement’s basis and why it should be approved as fair and reasonable, using the factors identified in Wolinsky v. Scholastic, Inc. The parties also must address any confidentiality provisions, non-disparagement provisions, and releases.
For any proposed attorney’s-fee award, the parties must provide appropriate supporting documentation. The court stated that merely identifying the fee’s proportion of the total settlement is insufficient. Adequate documentation should ordinarily include contemporaneous time records showing, for each attorney, the date, hours worked, and nature of the work. Insufficient documentation could lead the court to reject the proposed fee award.
Order
The court ordered the parties to submit the joint letter by January 20, 2022. It also directed them to appear by telephone for a settlement-approval hearing on January 27, 2022, at 12:00 p.m. Jorge Quispe was directed to appear and, if necessary, to use an interpreter. The opinion does not state that the court approved the settlement or entered the proposed dismissal.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.