Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 27, 2024

Franco v. All City Ironworks, LLC

Judge
Rearden
Docket
1:22-cv-06479
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
FlsaCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Franco v. All City Ironworks, Judge Rearden approved the parties’ Fair Labor Standards Act settlement and dismissed the case with prejudice.

Who this affects

Jose Franco, All City Ironworks, LLC, and Franco’s counsel are affected by the approved settlement. The case was dismissed with prejudice, subject to the court’s limited retained jurisdiction over settlement disputes.

What happened

Franco v. All City Ironworks, LLC was a Fair Labor Standards Act case in which the parties told the court they had reached a settlement.

The settlement required a total payment of $32,500: $21,349 for Jose Franco and $11,151, or one-third, for his lawyer, Abdul Karim Hassan, in fees and costs.

Judge Jennifer H. Rearden found the settlement fair and reasonable, approved it, and dismissed the case with prejudice. The court kept jurisdiction only to resolve disputes arising from the settlement and directed the clerk to close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Franco v. All City Ironworks, LLC · No. 1:22-cv-06479
Judge
Rearden
Date
Feb. 27, 2024

Background

The parties informed the court that they had settled Jose Franco’s claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). They submitted a proposed settlement for court approval.

Settlement Terms

The proposed settlement provided for an aggregate payment of $32,500 in connection with Franco’s FLSA claims. Of that amount, $21,349 was allocated to Franco, and $11,151—the remaining one-third—was allocated to his counsel, Abdul Karim Hassan, for attorney’s fees and costs.

Ruling

The court reviewed the proposed settlement and found it fair and reasonable under Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc. Judge Jennifer H. Rearden therefore approved the settlement and dismissed the case with prejudice. The court retained jurisdiction solely to resolve disputes arising from the settlement agreement and settlement of the action. The clerk was directed to terminate the settlement-approval filing and close the case.

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.