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

Quilodran v. 764 Third Avenue Wine & Liquor Inc.

Judge
Stewart Aaron
Docket
1:24-cv-09551
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
FlsaFee PetitionCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Quilodran v. 764 Third Avenue Wine & Liquor, Judge Aaron approved the wage-and-hour settlement, fees, and costs, then dismissed the action with prejudice.

Who this affects

Cesar Quilodran and the defendants in the action. The settlement resolved the case, which was dismissed with prejudice, while the court retained jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement.

What happened

In Quilodran v. 764 Third Avenue Wine & Liquor, the parties told the court they had reached a settlement of claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act, a federal wage-and-hour law. The court required them to submit the agreement and explain why it was fair and reasonable.

The court reviewed the settlement and found it fair and reasonable in light of the claims, the risks, and the costs of further litigation. It also found no concerns about overly broad releases or restrictive confidentiality terms. The court approved $10,646.66 in attorney fees and $470 in costs.

Judge Aaron approved the settlement and dismissed the action with prejudice and without costs except as provided in the settlement agreement. The court retained jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement, and the clerk was asked to close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Quilodran v. 764 Third Avenue Wine & Liquor Inc. · No. 1:24-cv-09551
Judge
Stewart Aaron
Date
Apr. 8, 2025

Background

Cesar Quilodran's case included one or more claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act. On March 4, 2025, the parties notified the court that they had reached a settlement. The court then directed them to submit the settlement agreement and explain why the agreement, including attorney fees and costs, was fair and reasonable. The parties later consented to have all proceedings handled by Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron.

Settlement review

After reviewing the parties' submissions and a supplemental letter with the relevant attorney-retainer agreement, the court found the proposed settlement fair and reasonable. The court considered the nature and scope of the claims, the risks of further litigation, and the related expenses. It also found that the settlement did not raise concerns about overbroad releases or restrictive confidentiality provisions.

The settlement requested $10,646.66 in attorney fees and $470 in costs. The fees represented one-third of the settlement amount after costs under a contingency-fee agreement. The court found the agreement reasonable and the requested fees consistent with it. The court also found the requested costs reasonable, including $405 in filing fees and $65 in service-of-process costs.

Ruling

Judge Aaron approved the settlement. The action was dismissed with prejudice and without costs except as stated in the settlement agreement. The court retained jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement and requested that the clerk close the case.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-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.