Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Nov. 30, 2022

Moody v. Inspire Summits LLC

Judge
Sarah Cave
Docket
1:20-cv-05834
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
FlsaCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Moody v. Inspire Summits LLC, Judge Cave approved the parties’ wage-and-hour settlement under the Fair Labor Standards Act, dismissed the action with prejudice, and retained jurisdiction to enforce it.

Who this affects

B. Moody and K. O’Brien, as plaintiffs, and Inspire Summits LLC and Christopher P. Skroupa, as defendants. The approved settlement resolved the action, which was dismissed with prejudice, subject to the agreement’s terms.

What happened

In Moody v. Inspire Summits LLC, B. Moody and K. O’Brien and the defendants reached a settlement in this wage-and-hour case under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The parties asked the court to approve their agreement.

Judge Sarah L. Cave reviewed the proposed agreement and related materials. She noted that the plaintiffs agreed to a payment schedule and that the defendants provided confessions of judgment, which addressed concerns about collecting the settlement.

Judge Cave found the agreement, including its attorney-fee and cost provisions, fair and reasonable. She approved the settlement, dismissed the action with prejudice and without costs except as provided in the agreement, retained jurisdiction to enforce it, found pending motions moot, and directed the Clerk to close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Moody v. Inspire Summits LLC · No. 1:20-cv-05834
Judge
Sarah Cave
Date
Nov. 30, 2022

Background

B. Moody and K. O’Brien brought a wage-and-hour case under the Fair Labor Standards Act against Inspire Summits LLC and Christopher P. Skroupa. The parties reached a settlement in principle and consented to the jurisdiction of Sarah L. Cave, a United States Magistrate Judge, for all purposes. They then filed a joint motion asking the court to approve their settlement agreement under the standard established in Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc.

Court’s analysis

The court explained that there is generally a strong presumption favoring fair settlements in Fair Labor Standards Act cases because the parties are usually better positioned than the court to assess the settlement’s reasonableness. The court also considered potential collection problems. The plaintiffs agreed to a payment schedule, and the defendants provided confessions of judgment. The court stated that these provisions supported finding the settlement reasonable.

After reviewing the motion, agreement, and exhibits, the court found that all of the agreement’s terms—including the allocation of attorney’s fees and costs—appeared fair and reasonable under the totality of the circumstances and the factors identified in Wolinsky v. Scholastic Inc.

Ruling

Judge Sarah L. Cave approved the settlement agreement. The action was dismissed with prejudice and without costs except as provided in the agreement. The court retained jurisdiction to enforce the agreement, ruled that any pending motions were moot, directed the Clerk of Court to mark the settlement motion as granted, and directed the Clerk to close the case.

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.