Alexander v. Almonte
- Andrew Carter
- 1:21-cv-11206
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Alexander v. Almonte, Judge Carter declined to accept the parties’ FLSA and New York Labor Law settlement for now because fee documentation was insufficient.
The parties to Ramon Alexander’s FLSA and New York Labor Law action, particularly plaintiff’s counsel because the proposed attorney-fee award lacked sufficient supporting records.
What happened
In Alexander v. Almonte, the parties told the court they had reached a settlement in an action under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law.
The plaintiff argued that the proposed settlement was fair and reasonable. But the plaintiff’s lawyer did not provide enough evidence to support the requested attorney-fee award, including contemporaneous records of time spent on the case.
The court was not prepared to accept the settlement at that time. Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. directed the parties to revise the agreement and terms and resubmit them for reconsideration by August 1, 2022.
The detailed version
- Alexander v. Almonte · No. 1:21-cv-11206
- Andrew Carter
- July 11, 2022
Background
Ramon Alexander brought this action against Wilfredo Almonte and others under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and New York Labor Law. On June 27, 2022, the parties notified the court that they had reached a settlement.
Settlement Review
Alexander submitted a letter and supporting documents arguing that the proposed settlement was fair and reasonable and did not raise the concerns identified by the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc. The court focused on the proposed attorney-fee award. It stated that plaintiff’s counsel had not provided enough evidence to establish a factual basis for the award or to allow the court to determine whether the fees were reasonable. In particular, counsel’s submission did not include contemporaneous records showing the time spent on the litigation.
Ruling
The court stated that it was not prepared to accept the settlement at that time. It directed the parties to revise the settlement agreement and its terms and resubmit them for reconsideration on or before August 1, 2022. The order did not state that the settlement was finally rejected or describe a ruling on the underlying labor-law claims.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.