Brown v. StagedNYC, LLC

Background

The court stated that it had been advised that Adrian Brown and defendants StagedNYC, LLC, and Debra Jo Jackson had reached a settlement. The settlement included claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), a federal law governing, among other things, wage and hour requirements. The order established procedures for resolving the case but did not itself approve the settlement or enter a dismissal.

Available procedures

The court described three alternatives:

1. Court approval for dismissal with prejudice. Under the Second Circuit’s decision in Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc., the parties could not dismiss settled FLSA claims with prejudice through an automatic dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A). They instead had to seek approval under Rule 41(a)(2). The parties first had to discuss whether they would consent to having all further proceedings conducted by the assigned magistrate judge. If they did not both consent, they had to file a joint letter by January 16, 2024, without identifying who withheld consent. If they did not consent, they had to submit by January 23, 2024, a joint motion explaining why the settlement was fair, addressing the considerations identified in Wolinsky v. Scholastic Inc., and attaching the settlement agreement. The court also required any request involving attorney’s fees to address fee reasonableness and include detailed attorney time records. The order stated that the court would not approve settlement agreements containing confidentiality provisions and would not seal settlement-review materials without a particularized showing overcoming the presumption of public access.

2. Dismissal without prejudice where no FLSA claims were settled. The parties could submit a stipulation dismissing the FLSA claims without prejudice under Rule 41(a)(1)(A), but only if they certified that there had been no settlement of those claims. The stipulation and certification were due January 16, 2024. If the parties could not make that certification, the court directed them to seek settlement review under the first procedure.

3. Offer of judgment. The court also reminded the parties that they could resolve the case through an offer and acceptance of judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 68(a). Relying on the Second Circuit’s decision in Mei Xing Yu v. Hasaki Restaurant, Inc., the order stated that court approval was not required for a Rule 68(a) offer of judgment in an action raising FLSA claims. Any executed offer and acceptance, along with a proposed judgment, were due January 16, 2024.

Other case-management ruling

The court rescheduled the initial pretrial conference from May 13, 2024, to March 13, 2024, at 4:00 p.m. The parties’ joint letter and proposed case-management plan were due March 6, 2024.

Disposition

The court ordered the parties to proceed under one of the described procedures and set the related deadlines. It did not rule on the merits of Brown’s claims, approve the reported settlement, dismiss the case, or enter judgment. Judge Gregory H. Woods signed the order.