Chowdhury v. Shuvo

Background

The plaintiffs are Tahmid Chowdhury and William DeGraaff. The defendants are Md Shahrish Sharif Shuvo and Shahrish Shuvo Engineering P.C. The parties advised the court that they had reached a settlement in a case under the Fair Labor Standards Act, the federal law governing certain wage and hour requirements.

Settlement-Approval Requirement

Judge Torres stated that the action could not be dismissed with prejudice based on the settlement unless the settlement agreement was approved either by the court or by the Department of Labor. A dismissal with prejudice would end the action in a way that generally bars refiling the same claims, but this order did not enter that dismissal or approve the settlement.

To seek dismissal with prejudice, the parties had to file a joint letter motion asking the court to approve the settlement, or documentation showing that the Department of Labor had approved it. The filing had to include the settlement agreement and be placed on the public docket by September 15, 2022. The letter had to explain why the proposed agreement was fair and reasonable, including:

- the plaintiffs’ possible range of recovery; - the burdens and expenses the settlement would avoid; - the seriousness of the litigation risks; - whether experienced counsel negotiated the agreement at arm’s length; and - the possibility of fraud or collusion.

The parties also had to address whether a genuine dispute existed about the number of hours worked or the compensation owed, and how much of the settlement the plaintiffs’ attorney would seek as fees.

Attorney Fees and Settlement Terms

Any request for attorney fees had to include contemporaneous billing records showing, for each attorney, the date, hours worked, and nature of the work.

The court warned that, absent special circumstances, it would not approve a settlement filed under seal or in redacted form. It also stated that, absent compelling circumstances, it would not approve agreements containing sweeping nondisclosure provisions or broad releases of claims unrelated to Fair Labor Standards Act issues.

Other Procedural Rulings

The parties could consent to proceed before Magistrate Judge Ona T. Wang, who would oversee settlement approval. The order stated that consent was voluntary and that withholding consent would not have negative consequences. If the parties consented and the court approved the form, further proceedings would occur before Judge Wang rather than Judge Torres. Any appeal would go directly to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.

Judge Torres stated that all pending motions were moot and vacated all conferences. The order did not state the settlement amount, approve the settlement, or dismiss the action with prejudice.