Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 31, 2023

Bernardino Hernandez v. G.A.L. Manufacturing Company, LLC

Judge
Katharine Parker
Docket
1:22-cv-10990
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
EmploymentFlsaCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Hernandez Estrela v. G.A.L. Manufacturing, Judge Parker approved the settlement and discontinued the wage-law case with prejudice.

Who this affects

Bernardino Hernandez Estrela, G.A.L. Manufacturing Company, LLC, and the plaintiff’s counsel were affected by the approved settlement; the action was discontinued with prejudice and the case was closed.

What happened

Bernardino Hernandez Estrela sued G.A.L. Manufacturing Company, LLC, under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law. The parties reached an agreement in principle and asked the court to approve their proposed settlement.

The court reviewed the settlement and the plaintiff’s explanation of why it was fair, reasonable, and adequate. The court concluded that the agreement reasonably addressed the plaintiff’s claims and compensated his lawyer for legal fees.

Judge Katharine H. Parker approved the settlement, retained jurisdiction to enforce it if necessary, and discontinued the action with prejudice and without costs. The clerk was directed to close the case.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Bernardino Hernandez v. G.A.L. Manufacturing Company, LLC · No. 1:22-cv-10990
Judge
Katharine Parker
Date
July 31, 2023

Background

Bernardino Hernandez Estrela brought this action against G.A.L. Manufacturing Company, LLC, under the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law. The parties consented to the court’s authority under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). They reached an agreement in principle to resolve the action and submitted a proposed settlement for judicial approval.

Settlement Review

Because the action included claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act, the court reviewed the proposed settlement for fairness. The plaintiff submitted a letter explaining why he believed the agreement was fair, reasonable, and adequate. After considering the parties’ submissions, the agreement’s terms, and the relevant circumstances, the court found that the settlement fairly and reasonably addressed the plaintiff’s claims and compensated his counsel for legal fees.

Ruling

The court approved the proposed settlement. At the parties’ request, it retained jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement if necessary. The court also ordered that the action be discontinued with prejudice and without costs, and directed the clerk to close the case. Judge Katharine H. Parker signed the order.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.