Velasquez v. The Baodega LLC
- Analisa Torres
- 1:24-cv-03486
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 5
Velasquez v. The Baodega LLC: Judge Torres approved the parties’ $15,000 wage-settlement agreement and closed the case.
Robinson Velasquez received $9,137.50 under the approved settlement. The Baodega LLC and Kenny Yie resolved the wage-and-hour claims asserted against them, and the case was closed. Plaintiff’s counsel received the approved attorney’s fees and costs from the $15,000 settlement.
What happened
In Velasquez v. The Baodega LLC, Robinson Velasquez claimed that The Baodega LLC and Kenny Yie failed to pay him minimum and overtime wages and violated New York notice and recordkeeping rules. The parties reached a settlement and asked the court to approve it.
The agreement provided $15,000 total, including attorney’s fees and costs, with $9,137.50 going to Velasquez. The court considered the disputed facts, litigation risks, estimated possible recovery, bargaining process, release language, and lack of confidentiality or non-disparagement terms, and found the settlement fair and reasonable.
Judge Analisa Torres also approved $5,862.50 in attorney’s fees and costs. The court granted the motion for settlement approval, directed the Clerk to terminate pending motions and vacate conferences, and closed the case.
The detailed version
- Velasquez v. The Baodega LLC · No. 1:24-cv-03486
- Analisa Torres
- Nov. 26, 2024
Background
Robinson Velasquez sued The Baodega LLC and Kenny Yie, individually, under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and the New York Labor Law. He alleged that he worked for the defendants for about 17 months, often more than 40 hours per week, but was not paid required minimum or overtime wages. He also alleged violations of New York’s notice and recordkeeping requirements.
The parties reached a settlement and asked the court to approve it. The proposed agreement provided for a total recovery of $15,000, including attorney’s fees and costs. Velasquez was to receive $9,137.50. He estimated that his maximum possible recovery was about $30,000; supporting calculations listed $29,727.68 in unpaid wages and $32,226.83 in unpaid wages with interest. The defendants disputed that Velasquez had been paid less than the federal or state minimum wage.
Settlement Approval
The court explained that FLSA wage claims require approval by the Department of Labor or a district court before the parties can settle them. The court evaluated whether the agreement was fair and reasonable by considering the possible recovery, the burdens and expenses of continued litigation, the parties’ litigation risks, the bargaining process, and the possibility of fraud or collusion.
The court found that the settlement provided approximately 28% of Velasquez’s estimated maximum recovery. Although that percentage was on the lower side of typical settlement awards, the court found it reasonable given the disputed facts and other legal uncertainties. The parties represented that the agreement resulted from legitimate bargaining between experienced labor and employment counsel.
The court also found that the release was sufficiently narrow because it covered only FLSA and New York wage-and-hour claims arising from Velasquez’s employment through the date the agreement was signed. The agreement did not prevent Velasquez from openly discussing his experience litigating the case and contained no confidentiality, nondisclosure, or non-disparagement provision.
Attorney’s Fees and Costs
Velasquez’s counsel requested $5,862.50 in attorney’s fees and costs, approximately 39% of the total settlement. Counsel Lina Stillman submitted billing records showing 17.5 hours of work at $400 per hour, producing a lodestar—reasonable hours multiplied by a reasonable hourly rate—of $6,995 in attorney’s fees. The court found the hours and hourly rate reasonable and accepted the requested award, which represented a lodestar multiplier of 0.84. The court also found $863 in court fees, service, and mediation costs reasonable.
Disposition
The court granted the parties’ motion for settlement approval. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate pending motions, vacate all conferences, and close the case.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.