Encarnacion v. City Catering Cafe Inc.
- Robert Lehrburger
- 1:21-cv-06843
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Encarnacion v. City Catering Cafe Inc., Judge Lehrburger approved the wage-settlement agreement and dismissed the case with prejudice.
The plaintiffs and defendants in the wage-and-hour lawsuit are affected: the settlement was approved, and the entire case was dismissed and discontinued with prejudice.
What happened
In Encarnacion v. City Catering Cafe Inc., the plaintiffs brought a damages case under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act, a wage law, and New York Labor Law. The parties jointly asked the court to approve their settlement agreement.
The court reviewed the agreement and the parties’ letter, considering the risks and costs of continuing the case, possible recovery, negotiation process, attorney’s fees, and potential fraud or collusion. The court noted that the agreement had no confidentiality restrictions, limited the release to wage-and-hour claims, and provided attorney’s fees within a fair and reasonable range.
Judge Lehrburger found the settlement fair and reasonable and approved it. Because the case had been resolved by settlement, the court dismissed and discontinued the entire case with prejudice, without costs or fees to any party except as provided in the settlement agreement, and directed that the case be closed.
The detailed version
- Encarnacion v. City Catering Cafe Inc. · No. 1:21-cv-06843
- Robert Lehrburger
- Sept. 22, 2022
Background
The plaintiffs brought an action for damages under the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq., and the New York Labor Law. The parties jointly requested approval of their settlement agreement and submitted a fully executed copy on September 21, 2022.
Court’s Review
The court explained that a federal court must determine whether a settlement of a Fair Labor Standards Act case is fair and reasonable and resulted from arm’s-length negotiation rather than employer overreaching. The court reviewed the settlement agreement and the parties’ joint letter. Its review considered, among other things, prior proceedings, the risks, burdens, and costs of continuing the case, the possible range of recovery, whether the agreement resulted from arm’s-length bargaining between experienced counsel or the parties, the amount of attorney’s fees, and the possibility of fraud or collusion.
The court noted that the agreement contained no confidentiality restrictions, narrowly limited the release to wage-and-hour claims, and set attorney’s fees within a fair, reasonable, and acceptable range.
Ruling and Disposition
The court found the settlement agreement fair and reasonable and approved it. Because the case was resolved by settlement, the court dismissed and discontinued it in its entirety, with prejudice, without costs or fees to any party except as provided in the settlement agreement. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate all motions and deadlines and close the case.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.