Monter Hernandez v. 99 Thai Playground LLC

Background

This Fair Labor Standards Act case involved Plaintiff Rodolfo Monter Hernandez and several defendants. The opinion states that four defendants were voluntarily dismissed: Andrew Pirgousis, whose dismissal was with prejudice; and Luigi Doe, Chai Thaimee, and Matt Bruck, whose dismissals were without prejudice. A stipulation concerning Pirgousis stated that the court would continue to maintain jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement.

The court noted that the record did not show that the parties had asked for judicial approval of any of the four dismissals under Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, a case concerning court review of settlements in Fair Labor Standards Act cases. The court also questioned Plaintiff’s counsel’s request for attorney’s fees for all work performed, because the billing records referred to “payment of settlement” and because some work may have involved defendants who were dismissed because they should not have been sued.

Questions About Plaintiff’s Declaration

The court also sought clarification about Plaintiff’s declaration. The declaration was filed on February 26, 2021, but signed on October 8, 2020. In it, Plaintiff swore under penalty of perjury that Chai Thaimee, Luigi Doe, and Matt Bruck were his employers under the law. Thaimee and Doe had been dismissed two months before the stated signing date, and Bruck was dismissed three months after the declaration was submitted with the motion for default judgment.

The court asked why those defendants were dismissed, whether the dismissals resulted from negotiated settlements, and, if the defendants were dismissed because they were not proper defendants, how that explanation could be reconciled with Plaintiff’s sworn statement.

Order

Judge Sarah Netburn ordered Plaintiff’s counsel to file two submissions by August 5, 2022: (1) a sworn attorney affidavit responding to the court’s concerns and including a copy of any settlement agreement, and (2) a letter application explaining the legal basis for not seeking judicial approval of the four dismissal stipulations and for requesting attorney’s fees for all work performed regardless of the outcome involving each defendant. The opinion is an order requiring further submissions; it does not decide the underlying Fair Labor Standards Act claims or the ultimate fee request.