Alston v. Citywide Mobile Response Corp.
- Ona Wang
- 1:21-cv-08380
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Alston v. Citywide Mobile Response Corp., Judge Wang directed the parties to choose a settlement-approval path after reporting that they had settled.
Shanice Alston, Nice Osorio, the other similarly situated individuals identified in the caption, Citywide Mobile Response Corp., and the other defendants; the order governed the process for handling the reported settlement and any attorney-fee request.
What happened
Shanice Alston and Nice Osorio sued Citywide Mobile Response Corp. and other defendants on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated. On August 1, 2023, the parties notified the court that they had reached a settlement.
The court directed the parties to state whether they would use an offer of judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 68 or file a motion asking the court to approve the settlement. If they chose the approval-motion process, they also had to say whether they agreed to have the magistrate judge decide the motion and propose a filing date.
If the parties filed nothing by August 4, 2023, the settlement-approval motion would be due August 31, 2023. Judge Ona T. Wang also required any approval motion to include the settlement agreement, an explanation of why it was fair and reasonable, information about how the settlement amount was calculated, and detailed records supporting any attorney-fee request.
The detailed version
- Alston v. Citywide Mobile Response Corp. · No. 1:21-cv-08380
- Ona Wang
- Aug. 1, 2023
Background
The plaintiffs, Shanice Alston and Nice Osorio, brought the case on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated against Citywide Mobile Response Corp. and other defendants. The parties notified the court that they had reached a settlement.
Court’s directions
The court directed the parties to file a notice by 5:00 p.m. on August 4, 2023, explaining how they wanted to proceed. They could use an offer of judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 68(a) instead of filing a motion seeking settlement approval. Alternatively, they could file a motion for approval under the settlement-review procedure described in Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc. If they chose that procedure, they had to state whether they consented to a decision by Magistrate Judge Wang under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 73, and they had to propose a filing date.
If the parties filed no notice by the deadline, the court set August 31, 2023, as the due date for the settlement-approval motion. The motion had to include a joint proposed settlement agreement and a joint letter explaining why the agreement was fair and reasonable. The letter also had to provide enough detail about how the settlement amount was calculated and include detailed billing records supporting any request for attorney’s fees.
Disposition and scope
Judge Ona T. Wang issued procedural directions concerning the parties’ reported settlement. The order did not approve or reject the settlement and did not decide the underlying claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.