Urbano v. Seabreeze Fish Market Inc. et al

Filing 24

ORDER Before me is the parties' joint request that the Court approve their settlement agreement in this case (the "Settlement Agreement"), a fully executed copy of which was submitted on June 28, 2024 (ECF 23-1). This case is an act ion for money damages under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq. ("FLSA") and under various provisions of the New York Labor Law. A federal court must determine whether settlement of an FLSA case is fair and reasonable and the subject of an arms-length negotiation, as opposed to an employers overreaching. See Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, 796 F.3d 199 (2d Cir. 2015). I have carefully reviewed the Settlement Agreement, as well as the parties lette r addressing whether the Settlement Agreement is fair and reasonable (ECF 23). I have considered, without limitation, the prior proceedings; the risks, burdens, and costs of continuing the action; the range of possible recoveries; the terms of the Settlement Agreement, including but not limited to the scope of the releases; whether the Settlement Agreement is the product of arms-length bargaining between experienced counsel or parties; the possibility of fraud or collusion; and the reasona bleness of the attorneys fees to be paid. Considering all these factors, I find that the Settlement Agreement is fair and reasonable. The Settlement Agreement hereby is approved. Consistent with the Settlement Agreement, this action is hereby dismissed with prejudice. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close this case. So Ordered. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Robyn F. Tarnofsky on 7/3/2024) (jca)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK DAVID URBANO 24-CV-1031 (RFT) Plaintiff, ORDER -againstSEABREEZE FISH MARKET INC., et al., Defendants. ROBYN F. TARNOFSKY, United States Magistrate Judge. Before me is the parties’ joint request that the Court approve their settlement agreement in this case (the “Settlement Agreement”), a fully executed copy of which was submitted on June 28, 2024 (ECF 23-1). This case is an action for money damages under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq. (“FLSA”) and under various provisions of the New York Labor Law. A federal court must determine whether settlement of an FLSA case is fair and reasonable and the subject of an arms’-length negotiation, as opposed to an employer’s overreaching. See Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, 796 F.3d 199 (2d Cir. 2015). I have carefully reviewed the Settlement Agreement, as well as the parties’ letter addressing whether the Settlement Agreement is fair and reasonable (ECF 23). I have considered, without limitation, the prior proceedings; the risks, burdens, and costs of continuing the action; the range of possible recoveries; the terms of the Settlement Agreement, including but not limited to the scope of the releases; whether the Settlement Agreement is the product of arms’-length bargaining between experienced counsel or parties; the possibility of fraud or collusion; and the reasonableness of the attorneys’ fees to be paid. Considering all these factors, I find that the Settlement Agreement is fair and reasonable. The Settlement Agreement hereby is approved. Consistent with the Settlement Agreement, this action is hereby dismissed with prejudice. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close this case. Dated: July 3, 2024 New York, New York So Ordered. _________________________ ROBYN F. TARNOFSKY 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?