Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled May 6, 2024

Radoncic v. ABC Properties Equities LLC

Judge
Clarke
Docket
1:23-cv-00003
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
FlsaCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Radoncic v. ABC Properties, Judge Clarke ordered the parties to submit settlement terms and supporting information for review of their FLSA settlement.

Who this affects

Sanel Radoncic and the defendants—ABC Properties Equities LLC, Fisher Cheeks Associates, LLC, and Alan Fisher—must provide information about their proposed settlement; the order also affects the similarly situated people identified in the complaint because the case was brought on their behalf.

What happened

Radoncic v. ABC Properties Equities LLC is a Fair Labor Standards Act case in which the parties told the court they had reached a settlement. The opinion does not state the settlement’s terms.

Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke ordered the parties to provide the settlement terms within 30 days, along with a joint letter explaining why the agreement is fair and reasonable. If applicable, they must also provide evidence supporting attorney-fee requests and legal support for any release, confidentiality, or non-disparagement provisions.

The court did not approve or reject the settlement in this order. Judge Clarke required additional information so the court could evaluate whether the proposed agreement fairly resolves the disputed issues.

The detailed version

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

Case
Radoncic v. ABC Properties Equities LLC · No. 1:23-cv-00003
Judge
Clarke
Date
May 6, 2024

Background

Sanel Radoncic brought this Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) case on behalf of himself and others similarly situated against ABC Properties Equities LLC, Fisher Cheeks Associates, LLC, and Alan Fisher, individually. The court was advised that the parties had reached a settlement.

The court explained that FLSA claims cannot be privately settled without approval from the district court or the Department of Labor. The court must determine whether the proposed settlement is fair and reasonable under the circumstances. Relevant considerations include the plaintiff’s possible recovery, the burdens and costs the settlement would avoid, the parties’ litigation risks, whether experienced counsel negotiated at arm’s length, and the possibility of fraud or collusion.

Required submissions

The court ordered the parties to provide the settlement terms within 30 days. It also ordered them to submit a joint letter of no more than five pages explaining why the settlement is a fair and reasonable compromise, including information about the five listed factors.

If the agreement includes attorney’s fees, the parties must provide factual support for the fee award, including contemporaneous billing records showing each attorney’s date of work, hours spent, and the nature of the work. If the agreement includes a release, confidentiality provision, or non-disparagement provision, the parties must provide support for each provision and cite relevant case law.

The parties were also reminded that, if all parties agree, they may consent to have a magistrate judge review and approve the settlement. The order states that there are no adverse consequences for withholding consent.

Disposition

The court did not approve or reject the settlement. It ordered the parties to submit additional materials so the court could determine whether the proposed settlement complies with the FLSA and fairly reflects a reasonable compromise of disputed issues. Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke signed the order.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-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.