Zhou v. Heydari, Inc.
- Sarah Cave
- 1:23-cv-03247
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Zhou v. Heydari, Judge Cave approved the parties’ FLSA settlement, dismissed the action with prejudice, and retained jurisdiction.
QiuHua Zhou and the defendants—Heydari Inc., Lowan Fashion, Inc., Mariam Heydari, and Zhongxin Wang—are affected by the approved settlement and dismissal. The court’s approval also addresses attorneys’ fees and costs.
What happened
Zhou v. Heydari, Inc. is a wage-and-hour case brought under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The parties asked the court to approve their proposed settlement, and QiuHua Zhou expressed serious concerns about collecting a judgment.
The court reviewed the settlement, damages calculation, fee agreement, billing records, and related materials. It found that the settlement terms, including the mutual release and attorneys’ fees and costs, appeared fair and reasonable. The court also noted that Zhou had asserted retaliation and discrimination claims in addition to wage-and-hour claims.
Judge Cave approved the settlement agreement. The court dismissed the action with prejudice, retained jurisdiction to enforce the agreement, found pending motions moot, and directed the clerk to close the case.
The detailed version
- Zhou v. Heydari, Inc. · No. 1:23-cv-03247
- Sarah Cave
- May 15, 2025
Background
QiuHua Zhou brought this wage-and-hour case under the Fair Labor Standards Act against Heydari Inc., doing business as Heydari Fashion and Heydari DC; Lowan Fashion, Inc.; Mariam Heydari; and Zhongxin Wang. The parties consented to Judge Sarah L. Cave’s authority to decide the matter and jointly moved for approval of a proposed settlement.
The parties submitted the settlement agreement, a damages calculation, Zhou’s retainer agreement with counsel, and counsel’s billing and cost records. The opinion states that Zhou had serious concerns about the defendants’ ability to pay and agreed to an installment payment schedule. The agreement also addressed claims for retaliation and discrimination that Zhou had asserted in addition to her wage-and-hour claims.
Settlement Review
Under the required review of Fair Labor Standards Act settlements, the court considered whether the agreement was fair and reasonable under the circumstances. After reviewing the submissions and participating in a settlement conference, the court found that all terms of the agreement appeared fair and reasonable.
The court specifically considered the agreement’s mutual general release. It concluded that the broader release was appropriate because Zhou had asserted retaliation and discrimination claims as well as wage-and-hour claims. The court also reviewed the allocation of attorneys’ fees and costs. It found no indication of overreaching or deceptive conduct in the 40% contingency arrangement between Zhou and her counsel, determined that counsel’s hourly rate and hours were reasonable, and noted that the $35,000 attorneys’ fee award was below counsel’s stated lodestar of $43,182.50. Counsel also submitted invoices supporting the requested costs.
Ruling
Judge Cave approved the settlement agreement. The court dismissed the action with prejudice and without costs except as provided in the agreement. It retained jurisdiction to enforce the agreement, found any pending motions moot, directed the clerk to mark the settlement motion as granted, and directed the clerk to close the case.
Effect
The approved agreement resolved the action. The opinion does not state the total settlement amount or describe the installment schedule’s specific terms. The court retained authority to enforce the settlement agreement.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.