Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Sept. 13, 2022

Hong v. Lin's Garden Restaurant, Inc.

Judge
Vernon Broderick
Docket
1:20-cv-02633-VSB-GWG
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
FlsaCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Hong v. Lin’s Garden Restaurant, Judge Broderick ordered the parties to submit their FLSA settlement for fairness review.

Who this affects

The plaintiff, Yingcai Hong, and the defendants, including Lin’s Garden Restaurant, Inc., were required to submit the settlement terms and supporting materials to the court.

What happened

In Hong v. Lin’s Garden Restaurant, Inc., the parties informed the court that they had reached a settlement in a Fair Labor Standards Act case. The court explained that this type of settlement requires approval by the court or the Department of Labor and must be fair and reasonable.

The court ordered the parties to provide the settlement terms within 30 days, along with a joint letter of no more than five pages explaining why the agreement fairly resolves disputed issues. The letter must address five listed factors, including possible recovery, litigation burdens and risks, the bargaining process, and possible fraud or collusion.

Judge Vernon S. Broderick also ordered the parties to provide factual support for any attorney-fee award, including contemporaneous billing records. The order required submissions for review; it did not state that the court approved or rejected the settlement.

The detailed version

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

Case
Hong v. Lin's Garden Restaurant, Inc. · No. 1:20-cv-02633-VSB-GWG
Judge
Vernon Broderick
Date
Sept. 13, 2022

Background

The court was advised that the parties had reached a settlement in this Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) case. The court explained that parties cannot privately settle FLSA claims without approval from the district court or the Department of Labor. The settlement must be shown to be fair and reasonable.

Required Fairness Review

The court stated that it would consider the total circumstances, including five factors: the plaintiff’s possible recovery; the extent to which the settlement would avoid expected burdens and expenses of proving the claims and defenses; the seriousness of the litigation risks; whether experienced counsel reached the agreement through arm’s-length bargaining; and the possibility of fraud or collusion.

If the settlement included attorney’s fees, the court stated that it would separately evaluate whether those fees were reasonable. The parties were required to submit evidence supporting any fee award, including contemporaneous billing records showing, for each attorney, the date, hours worked, and nature of the work.

Order

The court ordered the parties to submit the settlement terms within 30 days of the order. It also ordered them to submit a joint letter of no more than five pages explaining why the settlement was a fair and reasonable compromise of disputed issues and addressing the five listed factors. If the agreement included attorney’s fees, the parties also had to submit factual support for the fee award. The order required these materials for the court’s review and did not state that the court approved or rejected the settlement. Judge Vernon S. Broderick issued the order.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.