Bryant v. Motivate LLC

S.D. New York

Bryant v. Motivate LLC

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided July 11, 2023·No. 1:22-cv-03516·Unknown

Opinion

‘USDC SDNY DOCUMENT UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ELECTRONICALLY FILED SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK | DOC #: _.. □ ~----------------------------------------------------------------X DATE FILED: _ Tl v0 |

SHEMAR BRYANT, — — Plaintiff, 22-CV-03516 (VSB) (VE) -against- ORDER OF DISMISSAL MOTIVATE LLC, Defendant. wee eK VALERIE FIGUEREDO, United States Magistrate Judge: In this action under the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law, which is before this Court on the consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), the parties, having reached an agreement to resolve the action, have placed their proposed settlement agreement before this Court for approval. See Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc., 796 F.3d 1999 (2d Cir. 2015) (requiring judicial fairness review of FLSA settlements). On November 11, 2022, counsel for Plaintiff submitted a joint letter motion for approval of the parties’ proposed settlement agreement (the “Agreement”). See ECF Nos. 19, 19-1. The Court has reviewed the Agreement and corresponding letter in order to determine whether the proposed agreement represents a reasonable compromise of the claims asserted in this action, and, in light of the totality of the relevant circumstances, including the representations made in the parties’ letter and the terms of the proposed settlement agreement, it is hereby ORDERED that: 1. The Court finds that the terms of the proposed settlement agreement are fair, reasonable, and adequate, both to redress Plaintiffs claims in this action and to compensate Plaintiff's counsel for their legal fees, and the agreement is therefore approved. 2. This Court will retain jurisdiction over this matter for the purpose of enforcing the settlement agreement, if necessary.

3. Asaresult of the Court’s approval of the parties’ proposed settlement, this action is hereby discontinued with prejudice and without costs, provided, however, that, within 30 days of the date of this Order, if any aspect of the written documentation of the settlement is not completed, then Plaintiffs may apply by letter for the restoration of the action to the active calendar of the Court. 4. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the motion at ECF No. 23 and close this case. SO ORDERED. DATED: New York, New York July 11, 2023

United States Magistrate Judge

Copies to: All counsel (via ECF)

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

‘USDC SDNY DOCUMENT UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ELECTRONICALLY FILED SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK | DOC #: _.. □ ~----------------------------------------------------------------X DATE FILED: _ Tl v0 |

SHEMAR BRYANT, — — Plaintiff, 22-CV-03516 (VSB) (VE) -against- ORDER OF DISMISSAL MOTIVATE LLC, Defendant. wee eK VALERIE FIGUEREDO, United States Magistrate Judge: In this action under the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law, which is before this Court on the consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), the parties, having reached an agreement to resolve the action, have placed their proposed settlement agreement before this Court for approval. See Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc., 796 F.3d 1999 (2d Cir. 2015) (requiring judicial fairness review of FLSA settlements). On November 11, 2022, counsel for Plaintiff submitted a joint letter motion for approval of the parties’ proposed settlement agreement (the “Agreement”). See ECF Nos. 19, 19-1. The Court has reviewed the Agreement and corresponding letter in order to determine whether the proposed agreement represents a reasonable compromise of the claims asserted in this action, and, in light of the totality of the relevant circumstances, including the representations made in the parties’ letter and the terms of the proposed settlement agreement, it is hereby ORDERED that: 1. The Court finds that the terms of the proposed settlement agreement are fair, reasonable, and adequate, both to redress Plaintiffs claims in this action and to compensate Plaintiff's counsel for their legal fees, and the agreement is therefore approved. 2. This Court will retain jurisdiction over this matter for the purpose of enforcing the settlement agreement, if necessary.

3. Asaresult of the Court’s approval of the parties’ proposed settlement, this action is hereby discontinued with prejudice and without costs, provided, however, that, within 30 days of the date of this Order, if any aspect of the written documentation of the settlement is not completed, then Plaintiffs may apply by letter for the restoration of the action to the active calendar of the Court. 4. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the motion at ECF No. 23 and close this case. SO ORDERED. DATED: New York, New York July 11, 2023

United States Magistrate Judge

Copies to: All counsel (via ECF)

Bryant v. Motivate LLC, (S.D.N.Y. 2023).

Pincite

Bryant v. Motivate LLC (Bryant v. Motivate LLC) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related