Thomson Reuters News & Insight
Featured Content from WESTLAW
Beginning in June, Thomson Reuters News & Insight content will be available exclusively on WestlawNext®, as part of its Practitioner Insights offering. On June 21, the Thomson Reuters News & Insight website, iPhone® app and newsletters will be discontinued. See Frequently Asked Questions to learn more.

Legal

  •  
  •  

Courtroom, judge's view  No Credit iStock Photo

FLSA cases can be settled without judge's approval, opinion says

2/25/2013 COMMENTS (0)

By Carlyn Kolker

NEW YORK, Feb 25 (Reuters) - Cases brought under the Fair Labor Standards Act can be settled without a judge's approval, U.S. District Judge Brian Cogan of Brooklyn concluded in an opinion on Friday.

The determination was made in a ruling in a case brought by an employee of a private tutoring company who advised the court that she was settling her claim for unpaid wages before the defendant even entered an appearance in the case.

The judge's conclusion is a reversal of longstanding judicial convention of approving settlements in cases brought under the Fair Labor Standards Act, Cogan noted. "Although I have ruled to the contrary in the past, I have come around to the view that the procedure of a court requiring approval before it permits parties to voluntarily dismiss an FLSA action is incorrect," he wrote. "I believe the parties can voluntarily dismiss an FLSA case without judicial approval - if the defendant is willing to undertake the risk of doing so."

Judges typically approve FLSA settlements because they have relied on two Supreme Court decisions that spell out that an employer who settles a claim brought under the FLSA without the approval of either the Department of Labor or a court could face another lawsuit by the same employee, Cogan noted. But, the judge said, the practice "runs afoul" of rule 41 of the federal rules of civil procedure, which allows plaintiffs to halt a case for any reason.

In another recent case involving a FLSA claim, Cogan said, neither plaintiff nor defendant showed up for a fairness hearing over a settlement.

"I could have unleashed some of the tools that are available to compel compliance with court orders, but ultimately concluded that there was little point," Cogan wrote. Both sides had little money and had satisfactorily settled the case. "Ratcheting up the legal process to achieve some sort of Platonic form of the ideal of judicial vindication did not seem necessary to accomplish any purpose under the FLSA," Cogan wrote.

Abdul Hassan, the attorney representing plaintiff Donna Picerni, could not be reached for comment. No attorney entered an appearance for the tutoring company.

While Cogan's conclusion isn't binding on other judges in the district, it may compel them to follow suit, said Stephen Hans, an attorney in Long Island City, New York, who represents management in wage disputes. Hans hailed the decision as the removal of an obstacle from the settlement of wage-and-hour cases, which, he says, are "spreading like amoebas" in federal courts.

"I see it as one less hurdle you have to go through. Judges routinely don't alter (settlements)," he said. "Why cost my client more time to go down to the courthouse to get the judge's seal of approval?" Hans said.

The case is Donna Picerni v. Bilingual SEIT Preschool Inc, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York, No. 12-cv-04938.

For plaintiff: Abdul Hassan.

For Bilingual SEIT & Preschool Inc.: No appearance entered.

Follow us on Twitter @ReutersLegal | Like us on Facebook  


Register or log in to comment.

© 2013 Thomson Reuters