Schur v. Strategic Financial Solutions, L.L.C. et al
ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT... This action is dismissed with prejudice and without costs except as may be stated in the Settlement Agreement. The Court will retain jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement. Any pending motions are moot. The Clerk of Court is respectfully requested to mark ECF No. 73 as granted, and close this case. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Sarah L Cave on 4/26/21) (yv)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
CIVIL ACTION NO.: 17 Civ. 546 (PGG) (SLC)
STRATEGIC FINANCIAL SOLUTIONS, L.L.C.,
STRATEGIC CONSULTING, LLC, RYAN SASSON, and
ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT
SARAH L. CAVE, United States Magistrate Judge.
The parties in this wage-and-hour case under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) have
consented to my jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 636(c) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 73 for purposes of
reviewing their proposed settlement (ECF No. 72), and have now submitted a joint Letter-Motion
in support of settlement (ECF No. 73), proposed settlement agreement (ECF No. 73-1), and
supplemental documentation supporting Plaintiffs’ request for attorneys’ fees and costs (ECF
No. 77), for review and approval under Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc., 796 F.3d 199 (2d
Cir. 2015). Courts generally recognize a “strong presumption in favor of finding a settlement fair”
in FLSA cases like this one, as courts are not in as good a position as the parties to determine the
reasonableness of a FLSA settlement.” Souza v. 65 St. Marks Bistro, No. 15 Civ. 327 (JLC), 2015
WL 7271747, at *4 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 6, 2015) (citation omitted).
Having carefully reviewed the joint letter-motion in support of settlement, the Settlement
Agreement and accompanying exhibits, and the supplemental documentation concerning
Plaintiffs’ attorneys’ fees and costs, the Court finds that all of the terms of the proposed
settlement, including the allocation of attorneys’ fees and costs, appear to be fair and reasonable
under the totality of the circumstances and in light of the factors enumerated in Wolinsky v.
Scholastic Inc., 900 F. Supp. 2d 332, 335 (S.D.N.Y. 2012). Accordingly, the Court approves the
This action is dismissed with prejudice and without costs except as may be stated in the
Settlement Agreement. The Court will retain jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement.
Any pending motions are moot. The Clerk of Court is respectfully requested to mark ECF No. 73
as “granted,” and close this case.
New York, New York
April 26, 2021
SARAH L. CAVE
United States Magistrate Judge
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?