Tian v. New Ooki Sushi, Inc.
- Barbara Moses
- 1:20-cv-01950
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Tian v. New Ooki Sushi, Magistrate Judge Moses approved the $40,000 settlement and dismissed the action with prejudice and without costs.
Hua Tian, New Ooki Sushi, Inc. doing business as Ooki Sushi Japanese Cuisine & Bar, Xin Shu Liu, Baogui Ke, and Tian’s attorneys were affected by the approved settlement and dismissal.
What happened
In Tian v. New Ooki Sushi, Inc., Hua Tian and the defendants jointly asked the court to approve their settlement of Tian’s wage claims under federal and New York law.
The agreement required the defendants to pay $40,000 in four installments. Tian would receive $30,593, and his attorneys would receive $9,407 for fees and expenses. The agreement included releases, but Tian’s release was limited to wage claims, and it had no confidentiality provision.
Magistrate Judge Barbara Moses found the settlement fair and reasonable, considering the litigation risks and the differences between Tian’s work-hour claims and the defendants’ records. She approved the settlement and ordered the action dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
The detailed version
- Tian v. New Ooki Sushi, Inc. · No. 1:20-cv-01950
- Barbara Moses
- Jan. 6, 2021
Background
The court reviewed a joint request dated December 23, 2020, asking it to approve a fully executed settlement agreement. The agreement settled Hua Tian’s claims against New Ooki Sushi, Inc., doing business as Ooki Sushi Japanese Cuisine & Bar, Xin Shu Liu, and Baogui Ke. The settlement followed a judicially supervised conference held on December 8, 2020.
Settlement terms
The defendants agreed to pay $40,000. The parties represented that this amount was approximately 15.42% of Tian’s estimated maximum recovery if he prevailed on all issues at trial, including actual damages, liquidated damages, attorneys’ fees, and interest. Tian would receive $30,593 in full settlement of his claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law. His attorneys would receive $9,407 for fees and expenses. The payments were to be made in four installments through counsel’s attorney escrow account.
The defendants released Tian from claims related to the action. Tian released the defendants from wage-and-hour claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law. The court noted that, although the releases were not symmetrical, they favored Tian because he gave a narrower release. The agreement contained no confidentiality clause or other restriction on the parties’ ability to discuss the case or settlement. The proposed attorneys’ fees were below counsel’s recorded time-based fee calculation and $5,000 below the one-third contingency fee Tian had agreed to when retaining counsel.
Court’s analysis and ruling
Applying the required judicial review of the settlement, the court found the agreement fair and reasonable. Although the settlement was substantially less than Tian’s estimated damages, the court considered his significant risks at trial. In particular, Tian’s claims about the hours he worked conflicted with the defendants’ records, and he would have had to show that those records were unreliable, noncompliant, or fictitious.
Judge Barbara Moses approved the settlement. The court ordered that the action be dismissed with prejudice and without costs, and directed the Clerk of Court to close the case.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.