Jung v. Gina Group, Inc.
- Sarah Cave
- 1:19-cv-08624
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Jung v. Gina Group, LLC, Judge Vyskocil required more information before reviewing the parties’ proposed Fair Labor Standards Act settlement.
HyeYoon Jung and Gina Group, LLC, whose proposed settlement must undergo court review before approval.
What happened
In Jung v. Gina Group, LLC, the parties told the court that they had reached a settlement in principle. Because the complaint includes claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act, the settlement requires court or Department of Labor approval.
The court ordered the parties to file their proposed settlement agreement and a joint letter by March 25, 2022. The letter must explain why the settlement is fair and reasonable, including the possible recovery, avoided litigation burdens, risks, negotiations, and any fraud or collusion concerns. It must also address whether there is a genuine dispute about hours worked or compensation and how much the plaintiff’s attorney will seek in fees.
Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil also stated that, absent special circumstances, the court will not approve a settlement filed under seal or in redacted form. All other dates and deadlines were adjourned without a new date.
The detailed version
- Jung v. Gina Group, Inc. · No. 1:19-cv-08624
- Sarah Cave
- Feb. 8, 2022
Background
The court was informed by the Magistrate Judge that HyeYoon Jung and Gina Group, LLC had reached a settlement in principle. Jung’s complaint asserted claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), the federal law governing certain minimum-wage, overtime, and related employment requirements. Under the court’s discussion of Second Circuit precedent, an FLSA settlement must be approved by either the district court or the U.S. Department of Labor.
Court’s Order
The court did not approve the settlement at this stage. Instead, it ordered the parties to file a copy of the proposed settlement agreement and a joint letter by March 25, 2022. The letter must explain why the agreement is a fair and reasonable compromise of disputed issues rather than an employer’s improper waiver of statutory rights.
The parties were directed to address five fairness factors: (1) Jung’s possible recovery; (2) the burdens and expenses the settlement would avoid; (3) the seriousness of the litigation risks; (4) whether experienced counsel reached the agreement through negotiations at arm’s length; and (5) the possibility of fraud or collusion. The letter must also discuss whether a genuine dispute exists about the number of hours worked or compensation owed, and how much Jung’s attorney will seek in fees.
Disposition and Effect
Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil ordered the parties to provide the requested materials and stated that, absent special circumstances, the court would not approve a settlement filed under seal or in redacted form. The order adjourned all other dates and deadlines without setting a new date. The opinion does not state whether the settlement was ultimately approved.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.