Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 5, 2024

Kassel v. City of New York

Judge
Tarnofsky
Docket
1:23-cv-05211
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
FlsaCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Kassel v. City of New York, Judge Tarnofsky approved the parties’ fair and reasonable Fair Labor Standards Act settlement and directed the case closed.

Who this affects

The plaintiffs and defendants who entered into the settlement agreement, including the City of New York and the other named parties.

What happened

Kassel v. City of New York is a case seeking money damages under the Fair Labor Standards Act, a federal law governing certain pay and work-hour requirements. The parties jointly asked the court to approve their settlement agreement.

The court reviewed the agreement and the parties’ explanation of why it was fair. It considered the risks, costs, possible recoveries, negotiations between the parties and their lawyers, possible fraud or collusion, and the attorneys’ fees.

Judge Robyn F. Tarnofsky found the settlement fair and reasonable, approved it, and directed the Clerk of Court to close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Kassel v. City of New York · No. 1:23-cv-05211
Judge
Tarnofsky
Date
Feb. 5, 2024

Background

Ronnie Kassel and other plaintiffs brought an action for money damages under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938. The parties jointly requested approval of their settlement agreement. They submitted a fully executed copy of the agreement on January 26, 2024, along with a letter addressing whether the settlement was fair and reasonable.

Court’s Review

Because this was a Fair Labor Standards Act settlement reached before the court, the court reviewed whether the agreement was fair, reasonable, and the product of arms’-length negotiations rather than employer overreaching. The court considered the prior proceedings; the risks, burdens, and costs of continuing the case; the range of possible recoveries; whether experienced counsel or the parties negotiated at arms’ length; the possibility of fraud or collusion; and the reasonableness of the attorneys’ fees.

Ruling

Judge Robyn F. Tarnofsky found that the settlement agreement was fair and reasonable and approved it. The court also directed the Clerk of Court to close the case. The opinion does not state the settlement amount or provide the agreement’s individual terms.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.