Ayala v. BL 62 West 9th St, LLC
- Vernon Broderick
- 1:20-cv-05233
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Ayala v. BL 62 West 9th St, Judge Broderick approved the parties’ revised Fair Labor Standards Act settlement and terminated the case.
Angel Ayala and the defendants, including BL 62 West 9th St, LLC, whose revised settlement agreement was approved and whose case was terminated.
What happened
In Ayala v. BL 62 West 9th St, LLC, the parties told the court they had reached a settlement in a Fair Labor Standards Act case. The court explained that these claims generally require approval by the court or the Department of Labor.
The court had previously rejected the proposed settlement because it barred Angel Ayala from working for, seeking work from, or providing paid services to the defendants. The parties later submitted a revised agreement that removed the employment ban. The court also relied on its earlier finding that the $21,000 settlement and $7,727 in attorneys’ fees were fair and reasonable.
Judge Vernon S. Broderick independently reviewed the revised agreement and supporting evidence, found the agreement fair and reasonable, and granted the request to approve it. He directed the clerk to terminate the case.
The detailed version
- Ayala v. BL 62 West 9th St, LLC · No. 1:20-cv-05233
- Vernon Broderick
- June 3, 2022
Background
The parties advised the court that they had reached a settlement in Angel Ayala’s Fair Labor Standards Act case. Because the Department of Labor had not approved the agreement, the court reviewed whether the settlement was fair and reasonable.
Earlier Settlement Agreement
The parties initially submitted a settlement agreement that included a broad employment ban. It stated that Ayala waived the right to be employed by, assigned to, work for, seek employment with, apply to, accept employment with, or provide compensated services to any defendant in any capacity. The court previously denied approval of that agreement because the employment ban conflicted with the purposes of the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Revised Agreement
The parties submitted a revised proposed agreement after receiving extensions of the deadline. The revised agreement removed the employment-ban provision but did not otherwise change the settlement agreement. The court incorporated its earlier findings that the $21,000 settlement amount and $7,727 in attorneys’ fees were fair and reasonable. It independently reviewed the revised agreement and supporting evidence.
Ruling
The court found the revised settlement terms fair, reasonable, and adequate. Judge Vernon S. Broderick granted the parties’ request to approve the settlement, approved the revised agreement, and directed the clerk to terminate the case.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.