Hiciano v. Joyeria Elizabeth I, Corp.
- Barbara Moses
- 1:21-cv-04508
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 5
In Hiciano v. Joyeria Elizabeth I, Judge Valerie Caproni set requirements for resolving the parties’ agreed FLSA settlement.
Jose Hiciano, the similarly situated people he seeks to represent, and the corporate and individual defendants are affected by the settlement-approval, dismissal, filing, and conference requirements.
What happened
Hiciano v. Joyeria Elizabeth I, Corp. involves Jose Hiciano’s Fair Labor Standards Act claims against several corporations and individuals. The court was told that the parties had reached an agreement on all issues through a magistrate judge.
The court said the parties could not dismiss the case with prejudice unless the settlement was approved by the court or the Department of Labor. It also described the information required for a settlement-approval request, including the possible recovery, litigation risks, bargaining process, attorney’s fees, and whether a real dispute exists about hours worked or compensation. Alternatively, the parties could file a dismissal without prejudice with specified statements from plaintiff’s counsel and no release of the defendants.
Judge Valerie Caproni ordered the parties to file the required settlement materials or dismissal stipulation by the stated deadlines, or attend a conference if they filed nothing. The order did not approve the settlement or decide the underlying claims.
The detailed version
- Hiciano v. Joyeria Elizabeth I, Corp. · No. 1:21-cv-04508
- Barbara Moses
- Oct. 2, 2023
Background
The plaintiff is Jose Hiciano, individually and on behalf of similarly situated people. The defendants are Joyeria Elizabeth I, Corp.; Joyeria Elizabeth II, Corp.; Joyeria Elizabeth III, Corp.; Joyeria Elizabeth IV, Corp.; Tomasa Izaquirre, individually; and Michelle Izaquirre, individually. The opinion states that the claims arise under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). On September 19, 2023, the court was notified that the parties had reached an agreement on all issues through a magistrate judge.
Settlement-Approval Requirements
The court ordered that the parties may not dismiss the action with prejudice based on the settlement unless the agreement is approved by either the court or the Department of Labor. If the parties seek court approval, they must file a joint letter motion and the settlement agreement on the public docket by October 19, 2023. The letter must explain why the settlement is fair and reasonable and address:
- The plaintiff’s possible recovery;
- The burdens and expenses the settlement would avoid;
- The seriousness of the litigation risks;
- Whether experienced counsel negotiated the settlement at arm’s length; and
- The possibility of fraud or collusion.
The letter must also address whether there is a genuine dispute about the number of hours worked or the compensation owed, and the amount of attorney’s fees sought by plaintiff’s counsel. The court stated that, absent special circumstances, it would not approve a settlement filed under seal or in redacted form.
Alternative Dismissal Without Prejudice
The court noted that the Second Circuit has not decided whether parties may settle an FLSA case without court or Department of Labor approval by filing a dismissal without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A). If the parties choose that option, they must file the required stipulation on the public docket within 30 days. The stipulation must be accompanied by an affirmation from plaintiff’s counsel stating that the plaintiff or plaintiffs were clearly advised that the settlement does not prevent another lawsuit against the same defendants and affirming that the settlement agreement does not release the defendants. The court warned that this option carries a risk that the case could be reopened later.
Other Instructions and Disposition
The parties could also consent to have the assigned magistrate judge conduct all further proceedings and enter a final disposition by completing the consent form by October 10, 2023. The order stated that choosing not to consent would not have adverse substantive consequences. If no consent form, settlement-approval letter, or dismissal stipulation was filed by October 19, 2023, the court ordered a conference for October 20, 2023, at 10:00 a.m.
Judge Valerie Caproni issued an order governing the next steps for handling the reported settlement. The order did not approve the settlement, dismiss the action, or decide the merits of the FLSA claims.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.