Restrepo v. Monte's Trattoria, Ltd.

Background

Jose Restrepo filed the Wage Action under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), a federal wage law, and the New York Labor Law. He sued for himself and other similarly situated workers. The proposed settlement class consisted of all workers employed as servers, runners, bussers, and bartenders at Monte’s Trattoria between June 11, 2018, and October 7, 2024. The proposed class contained 30 people.

The complaint alleged that the defendants had common wage-and-hour practices, including failing to pay a spread-of-hours premium, failing to provide wage notices and statements that complied with New York law, illegally retaining tips, and failing to compensate some work time. The opinion did not decide whether those allegations were true.

Conditional Class Certification

The court granted the motion to conditionally certify the proposed class under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3) and 29 U.S.C. § 216(b) for settlement purposes only. The court found that the class satisfied the requirements of numerosity, commonality, typicality, adequate representation, predominance of common issues, and superiority of a class action. In particular, the court found that the class size of 30 met the numerosity requirement and that the alleged common wage policies allowed liability to be considered on a class-wide basis.

Preliminary Settlement Approval

The court granted the motion to preliminarily approve the settlement agreement as to the class. It found the agreement fair, just, reasonable, and in the class’s best interests after considering the adequacy of representation, the arm’s-length mediation and negotiations, the adequacy of the relief, and the fairness of the allocation among class members.

The court relied in part on the risks of continued litigation. The possible maximum damages were estimated at $1.691 million, but the class faced factual disputes about tip-credit notices, unpaid work, tip misappropriation, and incomplete payroll records. The court also noted the defendants’ asserted financial limitations, including that Monte’s Trattoria was a small, family-owned restaurant and that paying the settlement would be a significant financial burden.

The proposed settlement allocated payments based on hours worked. It also provided for a $10,000 service award to Restrepo and sought attorney fees of $166,666, described as one-third of the settlement fund. The court stated that the requested fee appeared reasonable under precedent, but required Restrepo to explain at the final-approval stage why the service award was justified and was not excessive or unfair to absent class members.

The court raised a separate concern about Section 4.4 of the agreement. That provision imposed a non-mutual general release on Restrepo alone, reaching beyond the wage-and-hour claims being settled. The court stated that such a one-way release was problematic and that it was unlikely to approve it.

Other Rulings and Next Steps

The court granted the motion to appoint Joseph & Kirschenbaum LLP as class counsel and Restrepo as class representative. It also granted the motion to approve the settlement notice as to its form and content, finding that the proposed mailing and distribution method was the best notice practicable under the circumstances and provided legally sufficient notice.

Class members were given 60 days from mailing of the notice to object to the settlement or opt out of the class. The court set a fairness hearing for June 18, 2025, to consider final approval of the settlement, a possible dismissal order and final judgment, attorney fees and costs, and service awards. The opinion therefore provided preliminary—not final—approval and did not resolve the merits of the alleged wage violations.