Velasquez v. Shogy Marketplace Corporation
- Paul Engelmayer
- 1:24-cv-02745
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 5
In Velasquez v. Shogy, Judge Engelmayer enforced the settlement and ordered defendants to pay Velasquez $25,220.
Luis Velasquez was awarded $25,220. Shogy Marketplace Corporation and Hafthadyn Saleh were ordered to pay that amount under the breached settlement agreement.
What happened
In Velasquez v. Shogy Marketplace Corporation, Luis Velasquez asked the court to enforce a settlement resolving his wage claims against Shogy Marketplace Corporation and Hafthadyn Saleh. The agreement required two $8,500 payments, but defendants did not make the first payment or fix the default within the 10-day period.
The court concluded that it had authority to enforce the agreement because the settlement and dismissal order kept the court’s authority for enforcement. It also found that the agreement was enforceable, Velasquez had performed his obligations, and defendants had clearly breached the agreement. Defendants did not oppose the motion.
Judge Paul A. Engelmayer granted Velasquez’s motion and ordered defendants to pay him $25,220 immediately. That amount included the unpaid settlement amount, liquidated damages for the default, and attorneys’ fees. The case remains closed.
The detailed version
- Velasquez v. Shogy Marketplace Corporation · No. 1:24-cv-02745
- Paul Engelmayer
- Mar. 7, 2025
Background
Luis Velasquez sued Shogy Marketplace Corporation and Hafthadyn Saleh under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law. The parties later settled all claims in principle. The court approved their settlement agreement on December 20, 2024, after an earlier dismissal order and an extension of time.
The agreement required defendants to pay Velasquez $17,000 in two monthly installments of $8,500, beginning December 30, 2024. It also contained an acceleration clause: after a 10-day period to cure a default, the amount owed at the time of default would become immediately due, along with $6,000 in liquidated damages and reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs. The agreement allowed Velasquez to seek a judgment against defendants for the unpaid amount.
Defendants did not make the first payment and did not cure the default within the 10-day period. Velasquez notified defense counsel of the default and warned that he would seek enforcement. He then moved to enforce the settlement, seeking $25,220: $17,000 in unpaid principal, $6,000 in liquidated damages, and $2,220 in attorneys’ fees. Defendants did not file an opposition.
Court’s Analysis
The court first held that it retained subject-matter jurisdiction, meaning legal authority to decide the enforcement request. The settlement agreement expressly stated that the court would retain jurisdiction solely to enforce the agreement, and the court’s dismissal order approved that provision.
The court then applied New York contract law. It explained that a settlement agreement is a contract and may be enforced through a motion when the agreement is valid. The court found no challenge to the agreement’s enforceability, no dispute that Velasquez had performed his obligations, and no dispute that defendants had failed to make the required payments. The court therefore found a clear breach of the settlement agreement.
Disposition
The court granted Velasquez’s motion to enforce the settlement agreement. It ordered defendants to pay Velasquez $25,220 forthwith, meaning immediately. The amount reflected the unpaid principal, liquidated damages for the default, and attorneys’ fees. The clerk was directed to terminate the pending motion, and the case remained closed.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.