Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 22, 2022

Nunez v. Broadway Beauty Wholesale Inc.

Judge
James Oetken
Docket
1:19-cv-00362-JPO
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
FlsaCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Nunez v. Broadway Beauty Wholesale, Judge Oetken approved a $50,000 FLSA settlement and dismissed the case with prejudice.

Who this affects

Plaintiff Sucre Nunez and the defendants in the action are affected by the approved settlement and dismissal with prejudice.

What happened

In Nunez v. Broadway Beauty Wholesale Inc., the parties told the court they had reached a settlement in Sucre Nunez’s Fair Labor Standards Act case.

The proposed settlement allocated $50,000 to Nunez in connection with his claims, with one-third of that amount designated for attorney’s fees and costs. The court reviewed the proposal and found it fair and reasonable.

Judge Oetken approved the settlement and dismissed the case with prejudice. The court kept jurisdiction only to resolve disputes arising from the settlement agreement and directed the Clerk of Court to close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Nunez v. Broadway Beauty Wholesale Inc. · No. 1:19-cv-00362-JPO
Judge
James Oetken
Date
Aug. 22, 2022

Background

The court was notified that the parties had reached a settlement in this Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) case. They submitted proposed settlement terms for court approval.

Proposed Settlement

The proposed settlement provided for $50,000 to be allocated to Plaintiff Sucre Nunez in connection with his FLSA claims. One-third of the settlement sum was to be collected as attorney’s fees and costs.

Court’s Analysis and Ruling

The court reviewed the proposed settlement under the standard set out in Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc. and found the terms fair and reasonable. Judge J. Paul Oetken approved the settlement and dismissed the case with prejudice. The court retained jurisdiction solely to resolve disputes arising from the settlement agreement and the settlement of the action. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.