Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 20, 2024

Yepez v. 3rd Avenue Dollar LLC

Judge
Barbara Moses
Docket
1:24-cv-00430
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
FlsaEmploymentCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Yepez v. 3rd Avenue Dollar LLC, Judge Moses approved a $17,500 wage settlement and dismissed the action with prejudice.

Who this affects

Luis Yepez and 3rd Avenue Dollar LLC are bound by the approved settlement. 3rd Avenue Dollar must make the three payments, and the action against it is dismissed with prejudice. Yepez’s attorneys receive the agreement’s specified filing-cost reimbursement and fee allocation.

What happened

In Yepez v. 3rd Avenue Dollar LLC, Luis Yepez claimed that 3rd Avenue Dollar owed him minimum and overtime wages and other damages under federal and New York wage laws. The company disputed that Yepez had ever been hired or authorized to work for it.

The parties reached a settlement requiring 3rd Avenue Dollar to pay $17,500 in three installments. Yepez would receive $11,396.67, while $6,103.33 would go toward his attorneys’ filing-cost reimbursement and fees.

Judge Barbara Moses found the settlement fair and reasonable, approved it, granted Yepez’s motion, and dismissed the action with prejudice.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Yepez v. 3rd Avenue Dollar LLC · No. 1:24-cv-00430
Judge
Barbara Moses
Date
June 20, 2024

Background Luis Yepez alleged that he worked for 3rd Avenue Dollar LLC as a stock clerk and was owed unpaid minimum and overtime wages, liquidated damages, and statutory damages under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law. The statutory-damages claims concerned allegedly missing wage statements and wage notices. Yepez estimated that he was owed approximately $14,975 in unpaid wages and that his maximum potential recovery could reach $39,950, excluding available prejudgment interest.

3rd Avenue Dollar disputed liability, stating that Yepez was never hired by the company and that any work or payments involving him were unauthorized. The parties negotiated before discovery through attorneys experienced in wage-and-hour litigation. Their agreement required 3rd Avenue Dollar to pay $17,500 in three installments: $6,000 within fifteen days after approval, followed by payments of $5,750 within thirty days and another $5,750 within sixty days of the first payment.

Settlement terms The agreement allocated $6,103.33 to Yepez’s attorneys: $405 to reimburse the filing fee and $5,698.33 as an attorney fee. The fee represented one-third of the net settlement consideration. Yepez would receive the remaining $11,396.67. The agreement also included a one-way release of wage claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law. The court noted that the agreement had no non-disparagement clause, rehiring prohibition, or confidentiality clause.

Court’s analysis Under the governing standard for reviewing Fair Labor Standards Act settlements, the court had to determine whether the agreement was a reasonable compromise rather than an improper waiver of statutory rights. Judge Moses found the settlement fair and reasonable in light of the risks of proving liability and damages, the possibility that Yepez might recover or collect nothing, and the parties’ desire to avoid the costs and delay of trial. She also found the attorney-fee allocation acceptable, even though it exceeded counsel’s reported lodestar, because counsel obtained a favorable result efficiently.

Disposition The court granted Yepez’s May 14, 2024 letter-motion, approved the proposed settlement, and dismissed this action with prejudice. The opinion also states that Yepez had previously voluntarily dismissed all claims against former co-defendant Mamat Mazot without prejudice; 3rd Avenue Dollar was therefore the sole remaining defendant when the settlement was approved.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.