Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 8, 2022

Jung v. Gina Group, Inc.

Judge
Sarah Cave
Docket
1:19-cv-08624
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
FlsaCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Jung v. Gina Group, LLC, Judge Vyskocil required more information before reviewing the parties’ proposed Fair Labor Standards Act settlement.

Who this affects

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

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

Case
Jung v. Gina Group, Inc. · No. 1:19-cv-08624
Judge
Sarah Cave
Date
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.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.