Cazarez v. T&T 130 Pizza Corp.
- Ronnie Abrams
- 1:20-cv-05545
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Cazarez v. T&T 130 Pizza Corp., Judge Abrams entered a $168,371.81 judgment for Cazarez against the defendants.
The plaintiff, Marcos Cazarez, received a $168,371.81 judgment, and T&T 130 Pizza Corp. and Tony Russo are jointly and severally responsible for paying it.
What happened
In Cazarez v. T&T 130 Pizza Corp., the court entered judgment for the plaintiff against T&T 130 Pizza Corp. and Tony Russo.
The court adopted Judge Moses’s Report in full and awarded the plaintiff $122,271.48 in damages, $4,725 in attorneys’ fees, $400 in costs, and $40,975.33 in prejudgment interest, for a total of $168,371.81. The defendants are jointly and separately responsible for these amounts.
Judge Abrams’s court also stated that the parties’ failure to timely object to the Report waived those objections and prevented appellate review of the decision.
The detailed version
- Cazarez v. T&T 130 Pizza Corp. · No. 1:20-cv-05545
- Ronnie Abrams
- Mar. 31, 2025
Background
The judgment states that, for the reasons in the Court’s March 31, 2025 Order, the court adopted Judge Moses’s Report in its entirety. The judgment itself does not identify the underlying claims or explain the Report’s analysis.
Award
The court awarded the plaintiff against the defendants, jointly and severally:
- $122,271.48 in damages; - $4,725 in attorneys’ fees; - $400 in costs; and - Prejudgment interest at $15.07 per day from October 20, 2017, through entry of judgment, calculated as $40,975.33 for 2,719 days.
The total award was $168,371.81.
Objections and Appellate Review
The judgment states that the parties’ failure to file timely objections to the Report operated as a waiver of those objections and precluded appellate review of the decision.
Disposition
Judge Ronnie Abrams’s court entered judgment awarding the plaintiff $168,371.81 against the defendants. The judgment does not state the underlying legal theory or whether the award followed a contested trial, a settlement, or a default.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.