Guerra v. Bunny Deli Inc.
- Vernon Broderick
- 1:22-cv-03498
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Guerra v. Bunny Deli, Judge Broderick ordered the parties to submit their proposed Fair Labor Standards Act settlement for review.
The order affected plaintiffs Martin Guerra and Flavio Guerra and defendants Bunny Deli Inc. and Rasalino Victorio-Mendosa, who were required to submit their proposed settlement and supporting materials.
What happened
In Guerra v. Bunny Deli Inc., Martin Guerra and Flavio Guerra sued Bunny Deli Inc. and Rasalino Victorio-Mendosa in a Fair Labor Standards Act case. The court was told that the parties had reached a settlement in principle.
The court explained that the parties could not privately settle their wage claims without approval from the court or the Department of Labor. To obtain approval, they had to show that the settlement was fair and reasonable, considering factors such as the possible recovery, litigation risks, expected costs, the parties’ negotiations, and any possibility of fraud or collusion.
Judge Vernon S. Broderick ordered the parties to submit the settlement terms and a joint letter of no more than five pages by August 11, 2022. If the agreement included attorney’s fees, the parties also had to provide evidence supporting those fees, including billing records. The order did not approve the settlement.
The detailed version
- Guerra v. Bunny Deli Inc. · No. 1:22-cv-03498
- Vernon Broderick
- July 15, 2022
Background
The court was advised that the parties had reached a settlement in principle in this Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) case. The opinion does not state the amount or other substantive terms of the proposed settlement.
Court’s analysis
The court explained that FLSA claims cannot be privately settled without approval from the district court or the Department of Labor. The settlement must be shown to be fair and reasonable. The court identified five relevant considerations: the plaintiffs’ possible recovery; the extent to which settlement would avoid the burdens and expenses of proving the claims and defenses; the seriousness of the parties’ litigation risks; whether experienced counsel negotiated the agreement at arm’s length; and the possibility of fraud or collusion.
The court also stated that any attorney’s-fee provision must be assessed separately. Counsel must provide a factual basis for the requested fees, including contemporaneous billing records showing, for each attorney, the date, hours spent, and nature of the work.
Order
Judge Vernon S. Broderick ordered the parties to provide the settlement terms by August 11, 2022, so the court could determine whether they complied with the FLSA and reflected a reasonable compromise of disputed issues. The parties also had to submit a joint letter of no more than five pages explaining why they believed the settlement was fair and reasonable, including information about the five identified factors. If the settlement included attorney’s fees, they had to submit supporting evidence. The order did not approve or reject the settlement.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.