Pimentel v. 615 W. 176th St. LLC
- Vyskocil
- 1:19-cv-01374
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Pimentel v. 615 W. 176th St. LLC, Judge Vyskocil approved the Fair Labor Standards Act settlement, dismissed the action with prejudice, and approved fees and costs.
Manuel Pimentel and defendants 615 W. 176th St. LLC and Chong S. Piper; the action was dismissed with prejudice under their court-approved settlement.
What happened
In Pimentel v. 615 W. 176th St. LLC, the parties reported reaching a settlement in principle in a case involving a claim under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The court required them to submit the proposed settlement and explain why it was fair, including the attorney-fee request.
The court reviewed the proposed settlement and found it fair and reasonable. It considered the plaintiff’s possible recovery and the challenges of continuing to trial, and noted that the parties had mediated and exchanged meaningful information and documents.
Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil ordered the action dismissed with prejudice, retained jurisdiction to enforce the settlement, approved $9,553.45 in attorney’s fees and $1,010.15 in costs, and canceled the scheduled fairness hearing.
The detailed version
- Pimentel v. 615 W. 176th St. LLC · No. 1:19-cv-01374
- Vyskocil
- June 10, 2020
Background
The complaint asserted a claim under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The defendants informed the court that the parties had reached a settlement in principle. Because court approval was required for the settlement, the court directed the parties to submit the proposed agreement and a joint letter explaining why it was fair and stating the amount of attorney’s fees sought. Plaintiff’s counsel submitted the proposed settlement, the parties’ joint fairness letter, the retainer agreement, and counsel’s bill.
Court’s analysis
The court applied the fairness review required for stipulated settlements. It considered the plaintiff’s alleged damages and possible recovery, the challenges the plaintiff would face if the case proceeded to trial, the parties’ participation in mediation, and their meaningful exchange of information and documents. The court found that the proposed settlement was fair and reasonable and was the product of arm’s-length bargaining between experienced counsel. The opinion does not state the total settlement amount.
Ruling
The court ordered that the action be dismissed with prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41. It retained jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement. The court also approved attorney’s fees of $9,553.45 and costs of $1,010.15, and canceled the fairness hearing scheduled for June 18, 2020.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.