Rojas v. Top Notch Finishes, Inc.
- Willis
- 1:22-cv-10105
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Rojas v. Top Notch Finishes, Judge Willis approved the Fair Labor Standards Act settlement and discontinued the action with prejudice and without costs.
The plaintiffs and defendants in this Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law action; the court-approved settlement resolves the action, subject to the stated 30-day documentation provision, and the court retained jurisdiction to enforce the settlement.
What happened
Rojas v. Top Notch Finishes, Inc. is an action under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law. The parties told the court they had reached an agreement in principle to resolve the case and submitted a proposed settlement for approval.
The court reviewed the proposed agreement and the parties’ explanation of why it was fair, reasonable, and adequate. The opinion does not state the settlement amount or provide the agreement’s specific terms.
Judge Jennifer E. Willis approved the settlement, including its treatment of the plaintiffs’ claims and their lawyers’ fees. The court retained jurisdiction to enforce the agreement if necessary, discontinued the action with prejudice and without costs, and directed the Clerk to close the case. Plaintiffs could ask to restore the case within 30 days if any part of the written settlement documentation was not completed.
The detailed version
- Rojas v. Top Notch Finishes, Inc. · No. 1:22-cv-10105
- Willis
- July 19, 2023
Background
Gregorio Rojas and other plaintiffs brought this action against Top Notch Finishes, Inc. and other defendants under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law. The parties consented to the magistrate judge’s authority to decide the case. After reaching an agreement in principle, they submitted a proposed settlement and a letter explaining why they believed the agreement was fair, reasonable, and adequate.
Court’s review
The court reviewed the parties’ submissions to determine whether the proposed settlement was a reasonable compromise of the claims. The opinion cites the requirement that courts review Fair Labor Standards Act settlements for fairness. The opinion does not disclose the settlement’s payment amount or specific terms.
Ruling
The court found that the proposed settlement was fair, reasonable, and adequate both to address the plaintiffs’ claims and to compensate plaintiffs’ counsel for legal fees. The court therefore approved the agreement. It also retained jurisdiction to enforce the settlement if necessary.
The court ordered that the action be discontinued with prejudice and without costs. It provided that, within 30 days of the order, the plaintiffs could apply by letter to restore the action to the active calendar if any part of the written settlement documentation was not completed. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.