Muy Gomez v. New Precious Nail Inc.
- Vyskocil
- 1:19-cv-02659
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Muy Gomez v. New Precious Nail, Inc., Judge Vyskocil approved the settlement, awarded $4,166.66 in fees, and dismissed the case with prejudice.
The settlement affected Silbia Dolores Muy Gomez, the defendants New Precious Nail, Inc., Pelino Yoon, and Sophia Yoon, and the attorneys whose fee request was approved.
What happened
In Muy Gomez v. New Precious Nail, Inc., the plaintiff told the court that she had reached a settlement with all defendants. The parties submitted documents supporting the settlement's fairness, and the court held a hearing.
The court reviewed the settlement under the Fair Labor Standards Act and concluded that it was fair and reasonable. The court relied in part on employment records that weakened the plaintiff's claim and on possible difficulties collecting a judgment because the business had closed and the individual defendants had relocated.
Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil approved the settlement and the request for $4,166.66 in attorneys' fees. Because the agreement required dismissal after it was signed, the court dismissed the case with prejudice and asked the clerk to close it.
The detailed version
- Muy Gomez v. New Precious Nail Inc. · No. 1:19-cv-02659
- Vyskocil
- Sept. 16, 2020
Background
Silbia Dolores Muy Gomez sued New Precious Nail, Inc., doing business as Precious Nails, Pelino Yoon, also known as Yung Yoon, and Sophia Yoon. She brought the action individually and on behalf of other similarly situated persons. On July 24, 2020, she informed the court that she had reached a consensual resolution with all defendants.
The parties later submitted a letter and supporting documents concerning the settlement's fairness. The court also held a hearing on September 15, 2020.
Court’s Analysis
The court reviewed the settlement under the Fair Labor Standards Act, a federal law governing matters including certain wage and hour protections, and applicable Second Circuit law. The court found that the settlement terms as a whole were fair and reasonable. It specifically considered employment records produced by a defendant that called into question the strength of the plaintiff's claim, as well as the difficulty the plaintiff might face collecting a judgment because the business had closed and the individual defendants had relocated. The court also found that the agreement appeared to result from an arms-length negotiation.
The court separately reviewed the request for $4,166.66 in attorneys' fees. It found that amount fair and reasonable because it was less than both the lodestar amount—the fee calculated from reasonable hours multiplied by reasonable hourly rates—and the amount agreed to in the retainer agreement.
Ruling
Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil approved the settlement as fair and reasonable and approved the $4,166.66 attorneys' fee request. The settlement agreement required the parties to sign a stipulation dismissing the case with prejudice after executing the agreement. Accordingly, the court dismissed the case with prejudice and requested that the clerk close the case.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.