Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Case Number: 7:19-cv-11340-JCM
Judge: Judith C. McCarthy
Court: United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Westchester County)
Defendant's Attorney: Mark Craig Rushfield
Description: White Plains, New York labor and employment lawyer represented Plaintiff, who sued Defendant on a Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. 201, et seq.
§202. Congressional finding and declaration of policy
(a) The Congress finds that the existence, in industries engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce, of labor conditions detrimental to the maintenance of the minimum standard of living necessary for health, efficiency, and general well-being of workers (1) causes commerce and the channels and instrumentalities of commerce to be used to spread and perpetuate such labor conditions among the workers of the several States; (2) burdens commerce and the free flow of goods in commerce; (3) constitutes an unfair method of competition in commerce; (4) leads to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce and the free flow of goods in commerce; and (5) interferes with the orderly and fair marketing of goods in commerce. That Congress further finds that the employment of persons in domestic service in households affects commerce.
(b) It is declared to be the policy of this chapter, through the exercise by Congress of its power to regulate commerce among the several States and with foreign nations, to correct and as rapidly as practicable to eliminate the conditions above referred to in such industries without substantially curtailing employment or earning power. violation theory.
Outcome: Motion for Settlement. Based on my review of the Agreement, (Docket No. 32-1), the joint letter, (Docket No. 32), and the documentation supporting the reasonableness of the attorney's fees and costs, (Docket No. 32-2), I find the settlement was the product of arm's-length negotiations between able counsel and that the terms of the Agreement, including the approval of Plaintiff's counsel's fees, are a fair and reasonable resolution of the case. See Johnson v. Brennan, No. 10 Civ. 4712(CM), 2011 WL 4357376, at *12 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 16, 2011) ("If the proposed settlement reflects a reasonable compromise over contested issues, the court should approve the settlement.") (citations omitted). Accordingly, the Court approves the settlement. The Clerk is respectfully requested to terminate the pending motion (Docket No. 32) and close the case. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Judith C. McCarthy on 8/3/2021) (vfr) (Entered: 08/03/2021)