Martinez v. Triumph Construction Corp.

Background

The court was informed that the parties had reached a settlement in this Fair Labor Standards Act case. The opinion does not provide the settlement amount, the proposed allocation of money, or other settlement terms.

Settlement-Approval Requirement

The court advised that the parties could not dismiss the action with prejudice—that is, with a final dismissal that generally prevents the same claims from being brought again—unless the settlement agreement was approved by the court or the Department of Labor. The parties were required to file a letter motion and the settlement agreement on the public docket within 30 days of the order.

The letter motion had to explain why the proposed settlement was fair and reasonable. It also had to address the plaintiff’s possible recovery; the burdens and expenses the settlement would avoid; the litigation risks; whether the agreement resulted from arm’s-length negotiations between experienced counsel; and the possibility of fraud or collusion. In addition, the letter had to discuss whether there was a genuine dispute about the number of hours worked or the compensation owed, and how much of the settlement the plaintiff’s attorney would seek as fees. The court stated that, absent special circumstances, it would not approve a settlement filed under seal or in redacted form.

Disposition

Judge J. Paul Oetken directed the parties to file a letter or stipulation meeting these requirements on or before September 30, 2022. The court adjourned all other filing deadlines, conference dates, and the trial date indefinitely. The order did not approve or reject the settlement and did not decide the underlying wage claims.