Shiwpaul v. Al-Boro Security, Inc.
- Stewart Aaron
- 1:23-cv-08001
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Shiwpaul v. Al-Boro Security, Judge Aaron ordered materials supporting the fairness of the parties’ Fair Labor Standards Act settlement.
The parties to the Fair Labor Standards Act settlement, including Radica Shiwpaul and Al-Boro Security, Inc., and the attorneys involved in the settlement.
What happened
In Shiwpaul v. Al-Boro Security, Inc., the parties reached a settlement after a January 29, 2024 settlement conference. The case includes claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act, a federal wage law.
The court required the parties to file a joint letter or motion addressing whether the settlement is fair and reasonable. The filing must discuss the claims and defenses, potential damages, the strengths and weaknesses of the case, the negotiation process, attorney fees, the lawyers’ work and experience, and the settlement agreement itself.
The filing is due February 14, 2024. Judge Stewart D. Aaron did not approve or reject the settlement in this order; he required the parties to provide information for the court’s review.
The detailed version
- Shiwpaul v. Al-Boro Security, Inc. · No. 1:23-cv-08001
- Stewart Aaron
- Jan. 31, 2024
Background
The case includes one or more claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Radica Shiwpaul sued individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated against Al-Boro Security, Inc., doing business as Alboro National Security. The parties reached a settlement at a settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron on January 29, 2024. They then consented to have all proceedings conducted before him.
Settlement Review Requirements
Because Fair Labor Standards Act claims are involved, the court required the parties to submit a joint letter or motion addressing whether the settlement is fair and reasonable. The order cited Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc., which requires court review of covered wage-and-hour settlements.
The submission must address the claims and defenses, the defendant’s potential monetary exposure and the basis for calculating it, the strengths and weaknesses of the plaintiffs’ case and the defendant’s defenses, reasons for any difference between the potential value of the claims and the settlement amount, and the litigation and negotiation process. It may also address other relevant issues, such as whether a judgment would be collectible if the case went to trial.
The parties must also explain the attorney-fee arrangement, attach the retainer agreement, provide information about the attorneys’ hours and relevant experience, and attach the settlement agreement itself. The filing deadline is Wednesday, February 14, 2024.
Disposition
The court ordered the parties to file the required joint letter or motion by the deadline. This order did not approve or reject the settlement; it required information for the court’s fairness review.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.