Reyes v. Concord Management of NY LLC
- James Oetken
- 1:22-cv-11003
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Reyes v. Concord Management, Judge Oetken directed public filing of a settlement-approval request by June 30, 2023.
Martha Reyes and Concord Management of NY LLC, the parties required to submit the settlement materials for review.
What happened
Reyes v. Concord Management of NY LLC is a Fair Labor Standards Act case in which the court was told that Martha Reyes and Concord Management had reached a settlement.
The court instructed the parties that they could not end the case with a final dismissal unless the settlement was approved by the court or the Department of Labor. They had to publicly file a letter and the settlement agreement by June 30, 2023, explaining why the agreement was fair and reasonable, addressing any dispute about hours or compensation, and stating the attorney-fee amount sought. Other deadlines, conferences, and the trial date were postponed indefinitely.
Judge J. Paul Oetken issued the order directing this settlement-review process and requiring the filing to remain public absent special circumstances.
The detailed version
- Reyes v. Concord Management of NY LLC · No. 1:22-cv-11003
- James Oetken
- June 9, 2023
Background
The court was notified that the parties had reached a settlement in this Fair Labor Standards Act case. The opinion does not state the settlement amount or other terms.
Court’s instructions
The court advised that the parties could not dismiss the action with prejudice based on the settlement unless the agreement was approved by either the court or the Department of Labor. The parties were directed to file a letter or stipulation and the settlement agreement on the public docket by June 30, 2023.
The filing had to explain why the proposed settlement was fair and reasonable. It also had to address the plaintiff’s possible recovery, the burdens and expenses the settlement would avoid, the litigation risks, whether experienced counsel negotiated at arm’s length, and the possibility of fraud or collusion. In addition, the filing had to discuss whether a genuine dispute existed about the hours worked or compensation due and how much the plaintiff’s attorney would seek in fees. The court stated that, absent special circumstances, it would not approve an agreement filed under seal or in redacted form.
Disposition and effect
Judge J. Paul Oetken directed the parties to follow this settlement-review process. The order also postponed indefinitely all other filing deadlines, conference dates, and the trial date. The opinion does not approve or reject the settlement in this order.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.