Nunez v. 2103 Honeywell LLC
- Vyskocil
- 1:21-cv-00601
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Nunez v. 2103 Honeywell LLC, Judge Vyskocil paused the conference, required settlement materials, and ordered plaintiffs to seek default judgment against Lineage Properties.
Plaintiffs Agustin Antonio Hiciano Nunez and Jose Ayende; Defendants 2103 Honeywell LLC, Lineage Properties LLC, Ephraim Fruchthandler, and Eli Fruchthandler; and the plaintiffs' attorney regarding the requested fees.
What happened
In Nunez v. 2103 Honeywell LLC, the court received notice that mediation between the plaintiffs and several defendants had been successful. Because the complaint includes claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act, the court said it must review and approve any settlement.
The court postponed the March 16, 2022 initial pretrial conference indefinitely and ordered the parties to submit their settlement agreement and a joint letter by April 20, 2022. The letter must explain why the proposed settlement is fair and reasonable, including information about possible recovery, litigation costs and risks, negotiations, possible fraud or collusion, disputed hours or compensation, and requested attorney fees.
Judge Vyskocil also ordered the plaintiffs to move for default judgment against Lineage Properties LLC by April 20, 2022. The order warned that failing to do so could lead to dismissal of the action against that defendant for failure to prosecute.
The detailed version
- Nunez v. 2103 Honeywell LLC · No. 1:21-cv-00601
- Vyskocil
- Mar. 14, 2022
Background
The court received a communication stating that mediation had been held and was successful between Plaintiffs Agustin Antonio Hiciano Nunez and Jose Ayende and Defendants 2103 Honeywell LLC, Ephraim Fruchthandler, and Eli Fruchthandler. The complaint asserts claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act, a federal law governing wages and working conditions.
Settlement Review
Because the case includes Fair Labor Standards Act claims, the court explained that judicial approval is required before the parties can finalize their settlement. The court must examine whether the settlement is fair and reasonable rather than an improper waiver of statutory rights.
The court ordered the parties to provide a copy of the settlement agreement by April 20, 2022. By the same date, they must submit a joint letter explaining why the proposed settlement is fair and reasonable. The letter must address the plaintiffs' possible recovery, the burdens and expenses the settlement would avoid, the litigation risks, whether experienced counsel negotiated at arm's length, and the possibility of fraud or collusion. It must also address whether the parties genuinely dispute the number of hours worked or the compensation owed, and how much the plaintiffs' attorney will seek in fees. The court stated that, absent special circumstances, it will not approve a settlement filed under seal or in redacted form.
Other Case Management Ruling
The court adjourned the initial pretrial conference scheduled for March 16, 2022 indefinitely. It also ordered the plaintiffs to move for default judgment against Defendant Lineage Properties LLC by April 20, 2022, following the procedures in the court's individual rules and practices. The court warned that failure to file that motion by the deadline may result in dismissal of the action against Lineage Properties LLC for failure to prosecute.
Disposition
Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil adjourned the initial pretrial conference indefinitely, ordered the parties to submit settlement materials and a joint fairness letter, and ordered the plaintiffs to move for default judgment against Lineage Properties LLC by April 20, 2022. The opinion does not approve the settlement itself.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.