Try our Advanced Search for more refined results
Searching dockets in Enea Scanlan x
Alert me of new activity
All Case Activity Alerts Include: Answers, Appeals, Complaints, Motions, Orders, Trial Notes
Labor: Fair Standards | New York Eastern
Order on Motion for Settlement Order Dismissing Case
ORDER re 38-1 Revised Settlement Agreement filed by Elvia Sanchez-Marin ("Plaintiff"): I have reviewed the motion filed by Plaintiff dated 8/7/2020, Dkt. No. 38 , seeking approval of the revised settlement agreement reached by Plaintiff and Defendants 212 Services, LLC and Adesanola Oladiran (collectively, the "parties"). The parties have consented to jurisdiction by a US Magistrate Judge. Having reviewed the revised settlement agreement, I find that "the agreement reflects a reasonable compromise of disputed issues [rather] than a mere waiver of statutory rights brought about by an employer's overreaching." Le v. SITA Info. Networking Computing, USA, Inc., No. 07-CV-86, 2008 WL 724155, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 13, 2008) (quotations and citation omitted); see also Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc., 796 F.3d 199 (2d Cir. 2015). In reaching this conclusion, I have considered, among other things, (1) that the settlement amount as reflected in the revised settlement agreement is substantial and fair in light of litigation risk and is within the possible range of recovery; (2) that the attorney's fees portion of the settlement, after costs, is one-third the total settlement amount, which is reasonable and commensurate with the degree of success obtained, see Fisher v. SD Protection Inc., 948 F.3d 593, 606-07 (2d Cir. 2020); (3) that the release provided for in the revised settlement agreement is limited in scope to only wage-and-hour claims; and (4) that the revised agreement does not impose a duty of confidentiality or include any other provision that offends fairness. For the reasons above, the terms of the settlement are fair and reasonable and otherwise satisfy the factors set forth in Wolinksy v. Scholastic Inc., 900 F. Supp. 2d 332, 335-36 (S.D.N.Y. 2012). See Fisher, 948 F.3d at 600 (instructing that Wolinksy factors guide fairness inquiry). The motion is granted and the revised settlement agreement is therefore approved. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. So Ordered by Magistrate Judge Sanket J. Bulsara on 8/10/2020. (Ferrara, Anthony)
Settlement
MOTION for Settlement Approval of the Revised Settlement Agreement by Elvia Sanchez-Marin. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1 (Revised Settlement Agreement), # 2 Exhibit 2 (Motion for Court Approval of Settlement)) (Avshalumov, Roman)
In the legal profession, information is the key to success. You have to know what’s happening with clients, competitors, practice areas, and industries. Law360 provides the intelligence you need to remain an expert and beat the competition.
TRY LAW360 FREE FOR SEVEN DAYS
Already a subscriber? Click here to login
Email (NOTE: Free email domains not supported)
First Name
Last Name
Job Title
PLEASE NOTE: A verification email will be sent to your address before you can access your trial.
Password (at least 8 characters required)
Confirm Password
Law360 may contact you in your professional capacity with information about our other products, services and events that we believe may be of interest.You’ll be able to update your communication preferences via the unsubscribe link provided within our communications.We take your privacy seriously. Please see our Privacy Policy.