Perez v. Liberty Food Enterprises, Inc.

Background

The court was advised that the parties had reached a settlement in a case brought by Antonio Perez and Sandra Mena Flores against Liberty Food Enterprises, Sanjiv Chand, and Andres Garcia. The settlement included claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), a federal law governing matters such as minimum wages and overtime pay. The order did not describe the settlement’s terms.

Court’s Directions

The court gave the parties three alternatives:

1. Dismissal with prejudice after court approval. A dismissal with prejudice generally prevents the same claims from being brought again. Because of the Second Circuit’s decision in Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc., the parties could not dismiss the FLSA claims with prejudice through the usual automatic dismissal procedure under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A). They instead had to seek approval under Rule 41(a)(2). The parties first had to discuss whether to consent to having all further proceedings conducted by the assigned magistrate judge. If they did not both consent, they had to submit a joint motion explaining why the settlement was fair, addressing the factors identified in Wolinsky v. Scholastic Inc., and attaching the settlement agreement. The court stated that it would not approve agreements containing confidentiality provisions and would not allow settlement-related materials to be filed under seal without a specific showing overcoming the presumption of public access. Any requested attorney’s fees also had to be supported under the applicable fee-reasonableness framework and with detailed time records.

2. Dismissal without prejudice if there was no FLSA settlement. The parties could submit a stipulation dismissing the FLSA claims without prejudice—a dismissal that does not bar refiling—only if they certified that there had been no settlement of FLSA claims. If they could not make that certification, they had to seek court review of the settlement under the first alternative.

3. Offer of judgment. The parties could resolve the case through an offer and acceptance of judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 68. The court explained that, under Second Circuit precedent, court approval was not required for a Rule 68 offer of judgment involving FLSA claims.

Disposition and Classification

The court directed the parties to follow one of these procedures and set deadlines, including April 29, 2022 for certain filings and May 6, 2022 for a joint settlement-approval motion if required. Judge Woods did not approve the settlement, dismiss the claims, or enter judgment in this order. This is a procedural order because it addressed the process for resolving and potentially dismissing the case rather than deciding the underlying wage claims.