Hines v. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center
- Katharine Parker
- 1:22-cv-03425
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Hines v. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Magistrate Judge Parker approved the FLSA settlement and discontinued the action with prejudice and without costs.
Paula Hines, the other plaintiffs described in the caption as similarly situated, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, and plaintiffs’ counsel.
What happened
Hines v. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center was brought under the Fair Labor Standards Act by Paula Hines, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated. The parties reached an agreement in principle to resolve the action and asked the court to approve their proposed settlement.
The court reviewed the agreement and the parties’ explanation of why it was fair, reasonable, and adequate. It found that the settlement fairly addressed the plaintiffs’ claims and compensated their attorneys for legal fees.
Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker approved the settlement. The court then ordered that the action be discontinued with prejudice and without costs and directed the Clerk of Court to close the case.
The detailed version
- Hines v. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · No. 1:22-cv-03425
- Katharine Parker
- Nov. 10, 2022
Background
Paula Hines brought this action individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The parties consented to the magistrate judge’s authority to decide the case under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). They reached an agreement in principle to resolve the action and submitted a proposed settlement agreement for judicial approval.
Settlement Review
Because Fair Labor Standards Act settlements require judicial review, the court examined whether the proposed agreement was a reasonable compromise of the claims asserted. The parties also submitted a letter explaining why they believed the settlement was fair, reasonable, and adequate.
Ruling
The court found that the settlement terms were fair, reasonable, and adequate both to address the plaintiffs’ claims and to compensate plaintiffs’ counsel for legal fees. The court therefore approved the proposed settlement. As a result, the action was discontinued with prejudice and without costs. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case.
The opinion does not state the settlement amount or describe the agreement’s other specific terms.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.