Bryant v. Motivate LLC
- Figueredo
- 1:22-cv-03516
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Bryant v. Motivate LLC, Judge Figueredo approved the FLSA settlement, retained enforcement jurisdiction, and discontinued the action with prejudice and without costs.
Shemar Bryant and Motivate LLC, as well as their counsel, are affected by the approved settlement and the order discontinuing the action.
What happened
In Shemar Bryant v. Motivate LLC, the parties reached an agreement resolving claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law and asked the court to approve it.
The court reviewed the agreement and the parties’ supporting letter, including the proposed compensation and legal fees. It found the agreement fair, reasonable, and adequate, and approved it.
Judge Valerie Figueredo retained jurisdiction to enforce the agreement if necessary. The court discontinued the action with prejudice and without costs, while allowing an application to restore the case if the written settlement documents were not completed within 30 days; the clerk was directed to close the case.
The detailed version
- Bryant v. Motivate LLC · No. 1:22-cv-03516
- Figueredo
- July 11, 2023
Background
Shemar Bryant brought this action against Motivate LLC under the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law. The parties consented to the magistrate judge’s authority under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). After reaching an agreement to resolve the action, they submitted a proposed settlement for court approval.
Settlement Review
The court reviewed the proposed settlement agreement and the parties’ supporting letter to determine whether the agreement represented a reasonable compromise of the asserted claims. The court found the settlement terms fair, reasonable, and adequate both to address Bryant’s claims and to compensate his counsel for legal fees. The court therefore approved the agreement.
Disposition
The court retained jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement if necessary. Because of the settlement approval, the action was discontinued with prejudice and without costs. The order provided that, within 30 days, an application could be made to restore the action to the active calendar if any part of the written settlement documentation was not completed. The clerk was directed to terminate the motion at ECF No. 23 and close the case.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.