Opinion
18-CV-9174 (OTW)
06-03-2020
ORDER ONA T. WANG, United States Magistrate Judge :
The Court is in receipt of the parties' proposed settlement agreement (ECF 48) and the memorandum of law in support of the settlement agreement, filed by Plaintiff (ECF 44). Because Plaintiff alleges a Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") claim, any settlement agreement must be approved by the District Court in accordance with Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House Inc., 796 F.3d 199 (2d Cir. 2015). See, e.g., Morris v. USPS, 18-cv-1920 (OTW), 2020 WL 2115347 (S.D.N.Y. May 4, 2020); Douglas v. Allied Universal Sec. Servs., 371 F. Supp. 3d 78, 81 (E.D.N.Y. 2019); Sanders v. CJS Solutions Grp, LLC, 17-cv-3809 (ER), 2018 WL 620492, at *4 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 30, 2018).
Plaintiff's memorandum of law in support of the proposed settlement agreement does not address how the proposed settlement is in accordance with Cheeks. Such factors that the parties need to address include, inter alia, "(1) the plaintiff's range of possible recovery; (2) the extent to which the settlement will enable the parties to avoid anticipated burdens and expenses in establishing their respective claims and defenses; (3) the seriousness of the litigation risks faced by the parties; (4) whether the settlement agreement is the product of arm's-length bargaining between experienced counsel; and (4) the possibility of fraud or collusion" and any structural issues such as the opt-in/opt-out process's compliance with the FLSA. Morris, 2020 WL 2115347, at *1-2 (citing Wolinsky v. Scholastic Inc., 900 F. Supp. 2d 332, 335 (S.D.N.Y. 2012)); see also Douglas, 371 F. Supp. 3d at 82-83 (denying preliminary approval of an FLSA settlement because the settlement did not comply with Cheeks/Wolinsky). The parties are directed to submit a supplemental memorandum of law addressing Cheeks by June 19, 2020.
SO ORDERED.
s/ Ona T . Wang
Ona T. Wang
United States Magistrate Judge Dated: June 3, 2020
New York, New York