Nieves Romero Rivera v. Silver Star Cleaners Inc.
- Paul Crotty
- 1:18-cv-04427
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Romero Rivera v. Silver Star Cleaners, Judge Crotty directed the parties to remove a duplicative consent-judgment clause before approving their settlement.
The plaintiffs and defendants who entered into the proposed Fair Labor Standards Act settlement agreement.
What happened
Romero Rivera v. Silver Star Cleaners is a Fair Labor Standards Act case in which the parties submitted a revised settlement agreement for court review. The court was required to decide whether the agreement was fair and reasonable.
The revised agreement still said that the parties would enter a $24,000 judgment by consent. The court had previously found that the settlement agreement itself was an enforceable contract, making that judgment unnecessary and duplicative.
Judge Paul A. Crotty directed the parties to remove the consent-judgment clause. The court stated that it would approve the settlement after the parties re-signed and filed the revised agreement.
The detailed version
- Nieves Romero Rivera v. Silver Star Cleaners Inc. · No. 1:18-cv-04427
- Paul Crotty
- Mar. 1, 2022
Background
The parties submitted a revised settlement agreement in this Fair Labor Standards Act case. Under the required court review, the court had to determine whether the settlement was fair and reasonable.
Issue
The revised agreement included a provision stating that the parties would enter a $24,000 judgment by consent.
Court’s reasoning
The court reiterated its earlier conclusion that the settlement agreement itself was an enforceable contract. Because of that, the proposed consent judgment was unnecessary and duplicated the agreement’s legal effect.
Ruling
The court directed the parties to strike the consent-judgment provision from the agreement. It stated that, once the agreement was re-executed and filed, the court would approve the settlement. The opinion does not itself state that the settlement was approved on March 1, 2022.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.