Perez v. Herbs Thai Bistro LLC
- Ronnie Abrams
- 1:22-cv-07606
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Perez v. Herbs Thai Bistro LLC, Judge Abrams ordered the parties to choose a magistrate-judge process or submit materials supporting settlement approval.
Mario Perez, the other people included in the proposed FLSA collective action, Herbs Thai Bistro LLC, Theichella LLC, and Nutcha Kethirun.
What happened
In Perez v. Herbs Thai Bistro LLC, Mario Perez brought a Fair Labor Standards Act case against Herbs Thai Bistro LLC, Theichella LLC, and Nutcha Kethirun on behalf of himself and others in a proposed group action. The court was told that the case had settled.
By April 8, 2023, the parties had to either agree to have Magistrate Judge Figueredo handle all further proceedings or jointly explain why the settlement was fair and reasonable. If they chose the second option, they had to provide supporting materials, including records of the lawyers’ fees and costs.
Judge Ronnie Abrams also warned that materials used to evaluate fairness could be placed on the public docket and said the court would not approve settlements containing overly broad claim waivers or bans on negative statements without an exception for truthful statements about the plaintiffs’ litigation experience. The order did not itself approve the settlement.
The detailed version
- Perez v. Herbs Thai Bistro LLC · No. 1:22-cv-07606
- Ronnie Abrams
- Mar. 8, 2023
Background
Mario Perez brought this Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) case on behalf of himself and others in a proposed collective action against Herbs Thai Bistro LLC, Theichella LLC, and Nutcha Kethirun. The court was informed that the case had been settled.
Order
The court directed the parties, by April 8, 2023, to take one of two steps:
1. Consent to conducting all further proceedings before Magistrate Judge Figueredo by completing the required consent form; or 2. Submit a joint letter explaining why the settlement was fair and reasonable and should be approved, together with supporting materials, including contemporaneous records of the attorney’s fees and costs provided for in the settlement agreement.
The court advised that materials on which it relied in deciding whether the settlement was fair could be filed publicly because judicial documents generally carry a presumption of public access.
Settlement Terms the Court Would Not Approve
The court stated that it would not approve a settlement that required plaintiffs to waive practically any possible claim against the defendants, including unrelated or unknown claims. It also stated that it would not approve a settlement barring plaintiffs from making negative statements about the defendants unless the agreement included an exception allowing truthful statements about the plaintiffs’ experience litigating the case.
Disposition
Judge Ronnie Abrams issued procedural instructions concerning the reported settlement. This order did not decide the merits of the FLSA claims or itself approve the settlement.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.