Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Dec. 2, 2022

Baldia v. RN Express Staffing Registry LLC

Judge
Gabriel Gorenstein
Docket
1:19-cv-11268
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
FlsaCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Baldia v. RN Express Staffing Registry LLC, Judge Gorenstein ordered the parties to explain why their Fair Labor Standards Act settlement is fair.

Who this affects

The plaintiff, the defendants, and their attorneys in this Fair Labor Standards Act case.

What happened

Baldia v. RN Express Staffing Registry LLC involves one or more claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act and a settlement that the court must review for fairness and reasonableness.

The court required the parties to file a joint letter or motion by December 16, 2022. Their submission must address the claims and defenses, possible damages, the strengths and weaknesses of each side’s position, the settlement negotiations, and other factors bearing on whether the settlement is reasonable.

Judge Gorenstein also required disclosure of the attorneys’ fee arrangement, the retainer agreement, actual fees incurred, and the settlement agreement. The parties may redact the settlement amount from the public filing, but must file an unredacted version under seal.

The detailed version

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

Case
Baldia v. RN Express Staffing Registry LLC · No. 1:19-cv-11268
Judge
Gabriel Gorenstein
Date
Dec. 2, 2022

Background

The case includes one or more claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The parties reached a settlement. Under the Second Circuit’s requirements for reviewing Fair Labor Standards Act settlements, the court directed the parties to provide information allowing it to evaluate whether the settlement is fair and reasonable.

Required submission

The parties must file a joint letter or motion by December 16, 2022. The submission must address:

- the claims and defenses; - the defendants’ potential monetary exposure and the basis for calculating it; - the strengths and weaknesses of the plaintiff’s case and the defendants’ defenses; - any factors explaining a difference between the potential value of the claims and the settlement amount; - the litigation and negotiation process; and - any other relevant issues, including whether a judgment would be collectible if the case went to trial.

The parties must also disclose the attorneys’ fee arrangement, attach the retainer agreement, provide information about actual attorneys’ fees incurred, and attach the settlement agreement itself.

Confidentiality and effect of the order

The parties may redact information revealing the settlement amount from the publicly filed submission. They must file an unredacted version under seal. The order directed the parties to submit information for settlement review; it did not state that the court approved or rejected the settlement.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.