Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Dec. 15, 2022

Morse v. Warren & Panzer Engineers, P.C.

Judge
Robert Lehrburger
Docket
1:22-cv-03879
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
FlsaCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Morse v. Warren & Panzer Engineers, P.C., Judge Lehrburger approved the FLSA settlement and dismissed the case with prejudice.

Who this affects

James Morse, Warren & Panzer Engineers, and the other defendants in the case; the settlement approval and dismissal ended the entire action.

What happened

In Morse v. Warren & Panzer Engineers, P.C., James Morse brought claims for damages under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law. The parties jointly asked the court to approve their settlement.

The court reviewed the agreement and found it fair, reasonable, and reached through negotiations between the parties. It considered the risks and costs of continuing the case, possible recovery, attorney fees, and potential fraud or collusion, among other factors.

Judge Robert W. Lehrburger approved the settlement and dismissed and discontinued the entire case with prejudice, without costs or fees to any party except as provided in the settlement agreement. The court also directed the Clerk to terminate pending motions and deadlines and close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Morse v. Warren & Panzer Engineers, P.C. · No. 1:22-cv-03879
Judge
Robert Lehrburger
Date
Dec. 15, 2022

Background

James Morse sued Warren & Panzer Engineers and other defendants for damages under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), a federal law governing certain wage and hour requirements, and the New York Labor Law. The parties jointly asked the court to approve their settlement agreement. They submitted a fully signed agreement on December 14, 2022.

Settlement review

The court explained that it had to determine whether the FLSA settlement was fair and reasonable and resulted from arm’s-length negotiations rather than employer overreaching. The court reviewed the agreement and the parties’ letter, considering the prior proceedings, the risks, burdens, and costs of continuing the case, the possible recovery, whether the agreement resulted from negotiations between experienced counsel or the parties, attorney fees, and the possibility of fraud or collusion.

The court noted that the agreement contained no confidentiality restrictions, that its non-disparagement provision was mutual and included appropriate exceptions, that its release was narrowly limited to wage and hour claims, and that the attorney fees fell within a fair and reasonable range.

Ruling

The court found the settlement 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.

Judge Robert W. Lehrburger issued the order.

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.