Alicea v. The Woodner Company LTD
- Philip Halpern
- 7:22-cv-09569
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Alicea v. The Woodner Company, Judge Halpern ordered settlement materials after the parties reached an agreement in principle.
The parties to Irene Alicea’s wage-and-hour lawsuit, particularly the plaintiff and The Woodner Company Ltd., were required to submit settlement materials for court review.
What happened
In Irene Alicea v. The Woodner Company Ltd, the parties told the court that they had reached a settlement in principle in a wage-and-hour lawsuit involving federal and New York law.
The parties jointly asked for more time to prepare a signed settlement agreement and a statement explaining why the settlement was fair and reasonable, including any attorney-fee provision. They also asked to postpone the scheduled initial conference.
Judge Philip M. Halpern ordered the parties to file the settlement agreement and joint statement by April 26, 2023, for review under the required settlement-approval process. The Clerk was directed to terminate the motion listed at Doc. 22. The order did not state that the settlement was approved.
The detailed version
- Alicea v. The Woodner Company LTD · No. 7:22-cv-09569
- Philip Halpern
- Mar. 22, 2023
Background
Plaintiff Irene Alicea, through counsel, and The Woodner Company Ltd. jointly informed the court that they had reached a settlement in principle. The lawsuit involved alleged wage-and-hour violations under the Fair Labor Standards Act, a federal wage law, and the New York Labor Law.
The parties asked to postpone the scheduled initial conference and requested time to prepare a signed settlement agreement and a joint application for court approval. They cited the requirement that certain wage-law settlements be reviewed for fairness and reasonableness, including any provision for attorney fees.
Court’s Action
Judge Philip M. Halpern ordered the parties to prepare and file, through the court’s electronic filing system, the settlement agreement and a joint statement explaining the basis for the proposed settlement, including any attorney-fee provision and why the agreement should be approved as fair and reasonable. The filing deadline was April 26, 2023.
The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate the motion pending at Doc. 22. The opinion text does not say that the court approved the settlement, and it does not state the disposition of the parties’ request to postpone the initial conference beyond the directives described above.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.