Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 13, 2022

Boza v. GRJ Construction Corp

Judge
Robert Lehrburger
Docket
1:22-cv-00846
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
FlsaEmploymentCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Boza v. GRJ Construction Corp., Judge Lehrburger approved the parties’ FLSA settlement and dismissed the case with prejudice.

Who this affects

Edison Boza and GRJ Construction Corp.; the settlement resolves Boza’s wage-and-hour claims against GRJ Construction Corp.

What happened

Boza v. GRJ Construction Corp. was a damages case under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law. The parties jointly asked the court to approve their settlement agreement.

The court reviewed the agreement and considered the risks and costs of continuing the case, possible recovery, the bargaining process, attorney fees, and the possibility of fraud or collusion. It found the settlement fair and reasonable, noting that it had no confidentiality or non-disparagement provisions and released only wage-and-hour claims.

Judge Robert W. Lehrburger approved the settlement and dismissed and discontinued the case in its entirety, with prejudice. The court ordered that no party receive costs or fees except as provided in the settlement agreement, and directed the clerk to close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Boza v. GRJ Construction Corp · No. 1:22-cv-00846
Judge
Robert Lehrburger
Date
June 13, 2022

Background

Edison Boza brought an action for damages against GRJ Construction Corp. under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), a federal wage-and-hour law, and the New York Labor Law. The parties jointly asked the court to approve their settlement agreement and submitted a fully executed copy on June 13, 2022.

Settlement Review

The court explained that a federal court must review an FLSA settlement to determine whether it is fair and reasonable and resulted from arm’s-length negotiation rather than employer overreaching. The court reviewed the settlement agreement and the parties’ letter. It considered the prior proceedings, the risks, burdens, and costs of continuing the case, the possible range of recovery, whether the agreement resulted from arm’s-length bargaining, the attorney-fee amount, and the possibility of fraud or collusion.

The court also noted that the agreement contained no confidentiality restriction or non-disparagement provision, limited the release to wage-and-hour claims, and provided attorney fees within a fair, reasonable, and acceptable range. Based on all the circumstances, the court found the settlement fair and reasonable and approved it.

Disposition

Judge Robert W. Lehrburger ordered that the case, having been resolved by settlement, be dismissed and discontinued in its entirety, with prejudice, without costs or fees to any party except as provided in the settlement agreement. The clerk was directed to terminate all motions and deadlines and close the case.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.