Burczyk v. Kemper Corporate Services, Inc. et al
Filing
47
ORDER DISMISSING CASE: For the reasons set forth in the attached Order, the Court finds that the revised Settlement Agreement, DE 46 , is fair and reasonable. This case is hereby closed. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Steven I. Locke on 4/5/2017. (Cea, Christine)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
----------------------------------------------------------------X
FRANCIS J. BURCZYK, on behalf of himself
and all others similarly-situated,
-against-
Plaintiff,
ORDER
15-CV-1483 (SIL)
KEMPER CORPORATE SERVICES, INC.
doing business as Merastar Insurance
Company, and JEFFREY FINDLEY in his
individual and professional capacities,
Defendants.
----------------------------------------------------------------X
LOCKE, Magistrate Judge:
On March 3, 2017 the parties submitted a joint motion seeking approval of a
Settlement Agreement in this Fair Labor Standards Act action. See Docket Entry
(“DE”) [44]. By way of Order dated March 28, 2017, the Court denied the joint motion
with leave to renew as it contained an impermissible non-publication clause. See DE
[45].
Thereafter, on April 3, 2017, the parties submitted a revised Settlement
Agreement, having stricken the non-publication clause, and requested Court
approval. DE [46]. Having reviewed the revised Settlement Agreement, the Court
finds that its terms are fair and reasonable. See Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House,
Inc., 796 F.3d 199 (2d Cir. 2015); Wolinsky v. Scholastic Inc., 900 F. Supp. 2d 332, 335
(S.D.N.Y. 2012) (requiring that a district court scrutinize an FLSA settlement
agreement to determine that it is fair and reasonable).
Therefore, the revised
Settlement Agreement is approved and the case is hereby closed.
.
Dated:
Central Islip, New York
April 5, 2017
SO ORDERED.
s/ Steven I. Locke
STEVEN I. LOCKE
United States Magistrate Judge
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?