Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 4, 2024

Mendez Firpo v. Barberry Rose Management Company Inc.

Judge
James Oetken
Docket
1:23-cv-05303
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
FlsaCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Mendez Firpo v. Barberry Rose, Judge Oetken approved a $34,000 FLSA settlement and dismissed the case with prejudice.

Who this affects

Plaintiff Rigoberto Mendez Firpo and Barberry Rose Management Company Inc. and the other defendants are affected by the approved settlement and dismissal with prejudice.

What happened

Mendez Firpo v. Barberry Rose Management Company Inc. is a Fair Labor Standards Act case in which the parties told the court they had reached a settlement.

The proposed settlement provided $34,000 for Plaintiff Rigoberto Mendez Firpo’s claims. One-third of that amount was designated for attorneys’ fees and costs.

Judge J. Paul Oetken found the settlement fair and reasonable, approved it, dismissed the case with prejudice, and retained jurisdiction only to resolve disputes about the settlement agreement.

The detailed version

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

Case
Mendez Firpo v. Barberry Rose Management Company Inc. · No. 1:23-cv-05303
Judge
James Oetken
Date
Apr. 4, 2024

Background

The parties notified the court that they had reached a settlement in this Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) case and submitted a proposed settlement for court approval. The proposed agreement allocated $34,000 to Plaintiff Rigoberto Mendez Firpo in connection with his FLSA claims. One-third of the settlement amount was designated for attorneys’ fees and costs.

Ruling

The court reviewed the proposed settlement and found it fair and reasonable under Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc. The court approved the proposed settlement at ECF No. 22 and dismissed the case with prejudice. The court retained jurisdiction solely to resolve disputes arising from the settlement agreement and the settlement of the action. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the motion and 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.