Kazi v. Kissena, Inc. et al

Filing 16

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER re: Settlement Approval: The Court has reviewed the proposed settlement and accompanying motion and has noted several issues that require further briefing from the parties. Wiithin fourteen (14) days of the date of this Order, the parties are hereby ORDERED to file an additional letter brief addressing these issues and showing cause why the court should approve the settlement agreement and dismiss the case. Ordered by Judge Roslynn R. Mauskopf on 9/12/2016. (Mauskopf, Roslynn)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
--------------------------------------------------------X
URMY KAZI,
Plaintiff,

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
16-CV-1687 (RRM) (CLP)

- against FLYNN MEYER KISSENA, INC.;
EDWARD FLYNN; and [FIRST NAME
UNKNOWN] MEYER,
Defendants.
-------------------------------------------------------X
ROSLYNN R. MAUSKOPF, United States District Judge.
In this action, plaintiff Urmy Kazi alleges, inter alia, that defendants failed to pay overtime
and the federally required minimum wage in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”).
The parties have indicated that they have settled this action. (Joint Mot. to Approve FLSA
Settlement (Doc. No. 14).) Judicial approval is required. See Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House,
Inc., 796 F.3d 199, 206 (2d Cir. 2015).
The Court has reviewed the proposed settlement and accompanying motion and has noted
several issues that require further briefing from the parties:
1. The parties’ filings contain no support for the proposed attorneys’ fees which constitute
39.1% of the total settlement amount, see Guareno v. Vincent Perito, Inc., No. 14-CV1635 (WHP), 2014 WL 4953746, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 26, 2014) (“Counsel must
provide a factual basis for a fee award, typically with contemporaneous time records.”);
2. The proposed settlement agreement contains a broad release beyond the claims in the
current case, see Panganiban v. Medex Diagnostic and Treatment Ctr., LLC, No. 15CV-2588 (AMD), 2016 WL 927183, at *3 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 7, 2016) (“Ordinarily, courts
scrutinizing FLSA settlements reject broad releases that waive practically any possible
claim against the defendants, including unknown claims and claims that have no
relationship whatsoever to wage-and-hour issues.” (internal quotation marks omitted));
3. The proposed settlement agreement contains a confidentiality provision, see Cheeks,
796 F.3d at 206 (noting with approval rejection of FLSA settlement agreement with
confidentiality provision that was “in strong tension with the remedial purposes of the
FLSA” (internal quotation marks omitted)); and

4. The proposed settlement agreement contains an employment waiver, see Flores v. Food
Express Rego Park, Inc., No. 15-CV-1410 (KAM), 2016 WL 386042, at *2 (E.D.N.Y.
Feb. 1, 2016) (“Such a waiver is in some tension with the broad remedial purposes of
the FLSA.”).
The Court has no position on any of these issues, and hereby ORDERS the parties to
submit, within fourteen (14) days of the date of this Order, an additional letter brief addressing
these issues and showing cause why the court should approve the settlement agreement and
dismiss the case.
SO ORDERED.
Roslynn R. Mauskopf
Dated: Brooklyn, New York
September 12, 2016

_____________________________
ROSLYNN R. MAUSKOPF
United States District Judge