Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 8, 2025

Holguin v. Quality Furniture NY LLC

Judge
Analisa Torres
Docket
1:23-cv-00004
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
FlsaCivil ProcedureFee Petition
In one sentence

In Holguin v. Quality Furniture NY LLC, Judge Torres adopted a damages recommendation and directed judgment for plaintiffs after defendants defaulted.

Who this affects

The judgment affects plaintiffs Camilo Holguin, Astrid Coello, and Tomaz Laskawski, and defendants Quality Furniture NY LLC, Bargain House by Quality Furniture Inc., Bargain House by Quality Furniture NY Inc., and Issa Nasrallah.

What happened

In Holguin v. Quality Furniture NY LLC, three plaintiffs alleged that the defendants violated federal and New York wage laws and breached a contract. The defendants did not respond to the lawsuit.

The court had already entered a default judgment against the defendants. After reviewing a magistrate judge’s recommendation on damages, the court found no clear error because the defendants did not object.

Judge Torres adopted the recommendation in its entirety and directed the Clerk to enter judgment for the plaintiffs for unpaid wages, additional damages, interest, attorneys’ fees, and costs. The court also directed the Clerk to close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Holguin v. Quality Furniture NY LLC · No. 1:23-cv-00004
Judge
Analisa Torres
Date
Jan. 8, 2025

Background

Camilo Holguin, Astrid Coello, and Tomaz Laskawski sued Quality Furniture NY LLC, Bargain House by Quality Furniture Inc., Bargain House by Quality Furniture NY Inc., and Issa Nasrallah. They alleged violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act, New York Labor Law, and breach of contract. Laskawski later joined the lawsuit as an additional plaintiff.

The defendants did not respond to the complaint. The plaintiffs moved for a default judgment, and the court ordered the defendants to explain why one should not be entered. The defendants did not respond, and the court entered a default judgment against them on January 30, 2024.

Damages recommendation

The court referred the case for an inquest—a proceeding to determine the amount owed after a default judgment. Judge Robyn F. Tarnofsky recommended awarding the plaintiffs $397,796.76 in damages, consisting of $21,450 in unpaid minimum wages, $155,598.20 in unpaid overtime wages, $177,048.20 in liquidated damages, and $43,700.36 in prejudgment simple interest. The recommendation also included $43.66 per day in prejudgment simple interest for each day after November 8, 2024, until the Clerk entered final judgment.

Judge Tarnofsky further recommended awarding $9,439.55 in attorneys’ fees and costs, plus post-judgment interest. The defendants did not file objections to the recommendation.

Ruling

The court reviewed the recommendation for clear error and found none. Judge Analisa Torres adopted Judge Tarnofsky’s report and recommendation in its entirety. The court directed the Clerk to enter judgment for the plaintiffs against the defendants for the listed unpaid wages, liquidated damages, prejudgment interest, attorneys’ fees and costs, and post-judgment interest under 28 U.S.C. § 1961. The court also directed the Clerk to close the case.

The opinion’s caption spells the first plaintiff’s surname “Holguin,” while one sentence in the narrative spells it “Hoguin.” This summary follows the caption and supplied case name.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.