Talavera v. 987 Supermarket Inc. d/b/a Los Vecinos Meat Market & Supermarket
Fulgencio Talavera v. 987 Supermarket Inc. d/b/a Los Vecinos Meat Market & Supermarket, Rafael A. Guzman, and Roman Rodriguez
- Ricardo
- 1:24-cv-03089
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
Talavera v. 987 Supermarket: Judge Ricardo approved the FLSA settlement and dismissed the case with prejudice.
Fulgencio Talavera and defendants 987 Supermarket Inc. d/b/a Los Vecinos Meat Market & Supermarket, Rafael A. Guzman, and Roman Rodriguez; the settlement resolved the entire case.
What happened
In Fulgencio Talavera v. 987 Supermarket Inc. and others, the parties asked the court to approve their settlement of Talavera’s damages case under the Fair Labor Standards Act, a federal wage-and-hour law.
The court reviewed the settlement, the risks and costs of continuing the case, the possible recovery, the lawyers’ fees, and possible fraud or collusion. It found that the agreement was fair, reasonable, and reached through arm’s-length negotiation.
Judge Henry J. Ricardo approved the settlement and dismissed and discontinued the entire case with prejudice, without costs or fees to any party except as provided in the settlement agreement. The clerk was directed to terminate the motions and deadlines and close the case.
The detailed version
- Talavera v. 987 Supermarket Inc. d/b/a Los Vecinos Meat Market & Supermarket · No. 1:24-cv-03089
- Ricardo
- Nov. 17, 2025
Background
Fulgencio Talavera brought an action for damages under the Fair Labor Standards Act, a federal law governing wages and working hours, against 987 Supermarket Inc. d/b/a Los Vecinos Meat Market & Supermarket, Rafael A. Guzman, and Roman Rodriguez. The parties consented to the authority of the magistrate judge to decide the case. They jointly asked the court to approve their fully executed settlement agreement.
Settlement Review
The court reviewed the settlement agreement and the parties’ letter. It also considered prior proceedings, the risks, burdens, and costs of continuing the case, the possible range of recovery, whether the agreement resulted from arm’s-length bargaining, the amount of attorneys’ fees, and the possibility of fraud or collusion. The court noted that the agreement contained no confidentiality restrictions, narrowly limited the release to wage-and-hour claims, and provided attorneys’ fees within a fair and reasonable range.
Ruling
The court found that the settlement agreement was fair and reasonable and approved it. Because the case was resolved by settlement, the court dismissed and discontinued it in its entirety, with prejudice, without costs or fees to any party except as provided in the settlement agreement. The clerk was directed to terminate all motions and deadlines and close the case.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.