Pena v. NB Network Solutions Inc.
- Ronnie Abrams
- 1:19-cv-01681
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 6
In Pena v. NB Network Solutions, Judge Abrams approved a $290,000 wage settlement and dismissed the action with prejudice.
The settlement affected Taisha Pena, Kevin De La Cruz, Jizmarc Padilla, and eleven opt-in plaintiffs whose claims against the defendants were resolved; it also approved payments to plaintiffs’ counsel.
What happened
Pena v. NB Network Solutions Inc. involved Taisha Pena, Kevin De La Cruz, and Jizmarc Padilla, who sued for themselves and similarly situated workers, claiming violations of federal and New York wage laws.
The parties agreed to settle the claims for $290,000. The agreement provided about $188,895.72 to the plaintiffs, with approximately $101,104.28 for attorneys’ fees and costs. The defendants disputed the hours worked and whether the workers were properly paid, while the plaintiffs sought to avoid the risks and expense of continuing the case.
Judge Ronnie Abrams approved the settlement, the attorneys’ fees and costs, and the limited release of claims related to the lawsuit. The court dismissed the action with prejudice and directed the Clerk of Court to close the case.
The detailed version
- Pena v. NB Network Solutions Inc. · No. 1:19-cv-01681
- Ronnie Abrams
- May 22, 2020
Background
Taisha Pena, Kevin De La Cruz, and Jizmarc Padilla sued NB Network Solutions Inc. and other defendants for themselves and other similarly situated people. They alleged violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), New York Labor Law (NYLL), and related New York regulations. The parties asked the court to approve a negotiated settlement agreement. The agreement resolved the claims of the named plaintiffs and eleven people who had joined the lawsuit.
The parties had initially discussed negotiating a class-wide settlement, but proceeded only on the plaintiffs’ claims after it became clear that the defendants lacked sufficient assets to satisfy a class-wide settlement.
Settlement Amount
The defendants agreed to pay $290,000. Approximately $101,104.28 was designated for attorneys’ fees and costs, leaving plaintiffs to receive $188,895.72. The plaintiffs stated that this amount represented all of their claimed FLSA overtime and minimum-wage damages, plus a substantial portion of their NYLL claim for unpaid spread-of-hours damages.
The court found the amount fair and reasonable. The plaintiffs estimated their FLSA overtime and minimum-wage damages at $153,145.66 after reviewing time and payroll records for approximately 300 current and former employees. The court noted that the settlement exceeded that estimate and also provided part of the potential NYLL recovery. The court also considered the parties’ acknowledged dispute over the number of hours worked and whether the defendants had paid the plaintiffs lawfully, as well as the litigation risks and costs that the plaintiffs would face without a settlement.
The court found that the agreement resulted from arm’s-length negotiations between experienced counsel with assistance from an experienced mediator.
Attorneys’ Fees and Costs
The court independently reviewed the fee request. It approved $96,666.66 in attorneys’ fees, approximately one-third of the total settlement, as a reasonable percentage of the recovery. It also approved $4,437.62 in costs. The costs related to filing the action, service of process, and transportation for mediation and other legal appointments, and counsel supplied documentation supporting them.
Release and Confidentiality
The court approved the release provision because it was limited to claims related to the lawsuit under the FLSA and NYLL. The plaintiffs did not release claims arising after the settlement date, and the agreement did not contain a general release. The agreement also contained no confidentiality provision or non-disparagement clause.
Disposition
The court approved the Settlement Agreement and dismissed the action with prejudice in accordance with that agreement. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case.
Read the full 6-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.