Yu v. Hasaki Restaurant, Inc. et al
| Mei Xing Yu |
| Hasaki Restaurant, Inc., Shuji Yagi, Kunitsugu Nakata, Hashimoto Gen and John Doe and Jane Doe #1-10 |
| 1:2016cv06094 |
| August 1, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| Queens |
| Jesse M. Furman |
| Fair Labor Standards Act |
| 29 U.S.C. ยง 201 |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
37
OFFER OF JUDGMENT: Pursuant to Rule 68 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, defendants Hasaki Restaurant, Inc., Shuji Yagi, Kunitsugu Nakata, Hashimoto Gen, John Doe and Jane Doe# 1-10 ("defendants") by their attorneys Pechman Law Group PLLC, hereby offer to allow judgment in this action to be taken against it and in favor of plaintiff Mei Xing Yu ("plaintiff"), in the amount of twenty thousand dollars ($20,000) plus reasonable attorneys' fees, costs, and expens es through the date of this offer. The amount paid to plaintiff shall be inclusive of all damages, liquidated damages, and interest. If plaintiff accepts this offer of judgment, no further payment will be due from defendants with respect to this mat ter, or any other matter, and as further set forth in this order. In light of the Second Circuit's decision in this matter, the Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment consistent with this accepted Offer of Judgment and close the case. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 5/4/2020) (jwh)
|
|
Filing
27
OPINION AND ORDER: In sum, the Court joins the growing number (albeit still minority) of judges in this Circuit to conclude that Rule 68 does not override the need for judicial (or DOL) approval of a settlement of claims under the FLSA. See Sanch ez, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 38292, at *4-6; Toar, slip op. at 7-14; Cantoran v. DDJ Corp., No. 15-CV-10041 (PAE), Docket No. 35, slip op. at 1-2 (S.D.N.Y. June 2, 2016); see also, e.g., Walker, 300 F.R.D at 602; Norman v. Alorica, Inc., No. 11-CV-4 33 (KKD), 2012 WL 54521956, at *2 (S.D. Ala. Nov. 7, 2012); Dees v. Hydradry, Inc., 706 F. Supp. 2d 1227, 1246-47 (M.D. Fla. 2010); Luna v. Del Monte Fresh Produce (S.E.), Inc., No. 06-CV-2000 (JEC), 2008 WL 754452, at *12-13 (N.D. Ga. Mar. 19, 20 08). That said, in light of the divide among courts in this Circuit, the Court concedes that there is a "substantial ground for difference of opinion" on the issue. 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b). Because the issue is also a "contr olling question of law" and an immediate appeal from the Court's order would "materially advance the ultimate termination of the litigation" (as the Clerk of Court would have to enter judgment without further proceedings if the Second Circuit were to reverse and hold that the Court lacks authority to review the settlement), the Court certifies this Order for interlocutory appeal under Title 28, United States Code, Section 1292(b). See also, e.g., Atlantica Holdings, I nc. v. Sovereign Wealth Fund Samruk-Kazyna JSC, 12-CV-8852 (JMF), 2014 WL 1881075, at *1-2 (S.D.N.Y. May 9, 2014) (discussing the relevant standards). Indeed, given the nature of the issue and the final judgment rule, it would be difficult (althou gh perhaps not impossible) for the issue to get to the Circuit absent an interlocutory appeal. And in light of the split among the district courts, resolution by the Second Circuit is plainly desirable, if not necessary. Absent a notice of appeal being filed within ten days, see 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b), the parties shall, no later than April 24, 2017, submit a joint letter to the Court explaining the basis for their proposed settlement and why it should be approved as fair and reasonabl e, with reference to the discussion in Cheeks, 796 F.3d at 200-01, and Wolinsky, 900 F. Supp. 2d at 335-36. If the parties file a notice of appeal, however, the case shall be stayed pending resolution of the appeal. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 4/10/2017) (ap)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the New York Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
