Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 10, 2020

Aquino v. Joseph's Auto Center, Inc.

Judge
Barbara Moses
Docket
1:18-cv-02009
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
EmploymentFlsaCivil ProcedureFee Petition
In one sentence

In Aquino v. Joseph's Auto Center, Judge Barbara Moses approved the parties’ wage-claim settlement and dismissed the case with prejudice.

Who this affects

Eddy Aquino, Joseph's Auto Center, Inc., Carl Bucalo, and Aquino’s attorneys.

What happened

In Aquino v. Joseph's Auto Center, Inc., the parties asked the court to approve a settlement of Eddy Aquino’s claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law. Joseph's Auto Center, Inc. and Carl Bucalo agreed to pay $52,500.

The agreement provided $34,277.28 to Aquino and $18,222.72 to his attorneys for fees and costs. The court found the settlement and the attorneys’ fee award fair and reasonable. The agreement included a limited release of wage-related and employment-separation claims and did not restrict the parties from discussing the case or settlement.

Judge Barbara Moses approved the settlement and ordered that the action be dismissed with prejudice and without costs. The court kept jurisdiction for the limited purpose of enforcing the agreement if necessary, and directed the Clerk of Court to close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Aquino v. Joseph's Auto Center, Inc. · No. 1:18-cv-02009
Judge
Barbara Moses
Date
Apr. 10, 2020

Background

The court reviewed a joint request by the parties to approve their settlement agreement under the Second Circuit’s requirements for reviewing settlements of Fair Labor Standards Act cases. The agreement required defendants Joseph's Auto Center, Inc. and Carl Bucalo to pay $52,500 to settle Eddy Aquino’s claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law.

The agreement allocated $34,277.28 to Aquino as a full settlement of his claims and $18,222.72 to his attorneys for fees and costs. The agreement included a unilateral but limited release covering wage-related claims and claims arising from Aquino’s separation from employment. The court noted that the agreement contained no confidentiality provision or other restriction on the parties’ ability to discuss the case or settlement.

Court’s Analysis

The court found that the settlement terms were fair and reasonable. It also found the proposed fee award reasonable. Of the $18,222.72 allocated to counsel, $1,084.08 would reimburse filing fees and other out-of-pocket costs, leaving $17,138.64 as the attorneys’ fee. The court stated that this amount was approximately one-third of the $51,415.92 net settlement payment after costs, a percentage within the range ordinarily approved in the district. The court also reviewed counsel’s time records, which showed $24,414.00 in billed time, and concluded that those records did not undermine the reasonableness of the fee.

Disposition

The court approved the proposed settlement. Judge Barbara Moses ordered that the action be dismissed with prejudice and without costs. The court retained jurisdiction for the limited purpose of enforcing the agreement if necessary and directed the Clerk of Court to close the case.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.