Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled May 4, 2022

Hernandez v. Uzzal Express Pizzeria Inc.

Judge
Paul Engelmayer
Docket
1:21-cv-00177
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
FlsaCivil ProcedureContract
In one sentence

In Hernandez v. Uzzal Pizzeria, Inc., Judge Engelmayer approved the parties’ revised wage-settlement agreement and closed the case.

Who this affects

The approved settlement affects Eduardo Hernandez and defendants Uzzal Pizzeria, Inc. and Mohammed Uzzal.

What happened

In Hernandez v. Uzzal Pizzeria, Inc., the parties asked the court to approve a settlement of claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law. The court had previously rejected an earlier agreement because its general release was too broad.

The revised agreement limited the release to wage claims under those laws brought in this case. It also excluded several types of claims, including claims for unpaid commissions, bonuses, tips, benefits, and improper deductions. The court found the agreement’s fee allocation, truthful-statement exception to its non-disparagement provision, and lack of confidentiality provision permissible.

Judge Engelmayer concluded that the revised agreement was reached through fair procedures and was fair and reasonable. He approved the agreement and directed the Clerk of Court to close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Hernandez v. Uzzal Express Pizzeria Inc. · No. 1:21-cv-00177
Judge
Paul Engelmayer
Date
May 4, 2022

Background

Eduardo Hernandez and the defendants, Uzzal Pizzeria, Inc. and Mohammed Uzzal, submitted a proposed settlement in an action asserting claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and New York Labor Law (NYLL). The parties first submitted an agreement on February 25, 2022, and refiled it on March 23, 2022, after correcting a filing error.

On April 6, 2022, the court rejected that earlier agreement because its general release extended beyond the wage claims at issue. The court directed the parties to submit a revised agreement, which they filed on April 29, 2022.

Court’s Analysis

The court explained that private settlement of FLSA claims with prejudice requires approval by either the district court or the Department of Labor. The court therefore had to determine whether the revised agreement was fair and reasonable. It also separately reviewed the reasonableness of the plaintiff’s attorney-fee allocation.

The court found permissible the revised agreement’s attorney-fee allocation, its exception allowing truthful statements within the non-disparagement provision, and its lack of a confidentiality provision. The court also found the revised general release permissible because it covered only known and unknown claims arising under the FLSA or NYLL that were brought in this action. The release excluded claims for unpaid commissions, bonuses, tips, fringe benefits, accrued deductions, and improper deductions.

Disposition

Judge Engelmayer concluded that the revised agreement was reached through procedurally fair means and was fair and reasonable under the governing standard. The court approved the Revised Agreement and directed the Clerk of Court to close the case.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-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.