Raamanuj v. Zaika Food Company LLC

S.D. New York

Raamanuj v. Zaika Food Company LLC

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided February 23, 2022·No. 1:20-cv-04317·Unknown

Opinion

USDC SDNY UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DOCUMENT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK | ELECTRONICALLY FIL DOC #: Sharma Raamanuj, DATE FILED; 2/23/2022 Plaintiff, 20-cv-4317 (KHP) -against- ORDER OF DISMISSAL Zaika Food Company LLC et al., Defendants.

KATHARINE H. PARKER, 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 in principle 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). Plaintiff has also submitted a letter detailing why they believe the proposed settlement agreement is fair, reasonable, and adequate. (ECF No. 68.) This Court has reviewed Plaintiff's submissions 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 Plaintiff’s letter (which included an arms- length settlement mediation with an experienced mediator), 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 Plaintiff's claims in this action and to compensate Plaintiff's counsel for their legal fees, and the agreement is therefore approved. 2. In accordance with the parties’ request, this Court will retain jurisdiction over this matter for the purpose of enforcing the settlement agreement, if necessary. 3. As a result of the Court’s approval of the parties’ proposed settlement, this action is hereby discontinued with prejudice and without costs. 4. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case on the Docket of the Court. Dated: New York, New York February 23, 2022 SO ORDERED. kethar ut + fink L4 KATHARINE H. PARKER United States Magistrate Judge

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

USDC SDNY UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DOCUMENT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK | ELECTRONICALLY FIL DOC #: Sharma Raamanuj, DATE FILED; 2/23/2022 Plaintiff, 20-cv-4317 (KHP) -against- ORDER OF DISMISSAL Zaika Food Company LLC et al., Defendants.

KATHARINE H. PARKER, 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 in principle 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). Plaintiff has also submitted a letter detailing why they believe the proposed settlement agreement is fair, reasonable, and adequate. (ECF No. 68.) This Court has reviewed Plaintiff's submissions 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 Plaintiff’s letter (which included an arms- length settlement mediation with an experienced mediator), 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 Plaintiff's claims in this action and to compensate Plaintiff's counsel for their legal fees, and the agreement is therefore approved. 2. In accordance with the parties’ request, this Court will retain jurisdiction over this matter for the purpose of enforcing the settlement agreement, if necessary. 3. As a result of the Court’s approval of the parties’ proposed settlement, this action is hereby discontinued with prejudice and without costs. 4. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case on the Docket of the Court. Dated: New York, New York February 23, 2022 SO ORDERED. kethar ut + fink L4 KATHARINE H. PARKER United States Magistrate Judge

Raamanuj v. Zaika Food Company LLC, (S.D.N.Y. 2022).

Pincite

Raamanuj v. Zaika Food Company LLC (Raamanuj v. Zaika Food Company LLC) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related