Wong v. The John Allan Company
- Andrew Carter
- 1:20-cv-09800
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Wong v. The John Allan Company, Judge Carter did not approve the FLSA settlement at this time and requested information about attorney’s fees.
Wong, The John Allan Company, John Allan, and the others Wong seeks to represent in the wage case.
What happened
Wong v. The John Allan Company is a wage case brought under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law by Wong, individually and for others similarly situated. The court received the parties’ settlement agreement.
The court explained that FLSA claims cannot be privately dismissed through a settlement without court approval. It must review the agreement to decide whether it is fair and reasonable.
Because Wong had not clearly explained how attorney’s fees would be allocated, Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. was not prepared to approve the settlement. He directed the parties to provide that information by December 16, 2022.
The detailed version
- Wong v. The John Allan Company · No. 1:20-cv-09800
- Andrew Carter
- Dec. 14, 2022
Background
Wong brought this action individually and on behalf of others similarly situated against The John Allan Company and John Allan. The complaint asserted claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), a federal wage law, and the New York Labor Law. The action was originally filed on November 20, 2020.
The court received the parties’ settlement agreement. It explained that parties cannot settle FLSA claims through a private stipulated dismissal with prejudice without approval from the district court. The court must examine the agreement to determine whether it is fair and reasonable.
Court’s Analysis
The court identified a missing piece of information concerning the allocation of attorney’s fees. Because Wong had not clearly provided that information, the court could not complete its review of whether the settlement was fair and reasonable.
Disposition
The court was not prepared to approve the settlement agreement at that time. It directed the parties to submit the requested attorney’s-fee allocation information by December 16, 2022. The order did not state that the settlement was approved or rejected permanently.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.