Mahabir v. Queens Dollar, Inc.
- Robert Lehrburger
- 1:19-cv-09395
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Mahabir v. Queens Dollar, Judge Lehrburger approved the Fair Labor Standards Act settlement and dismissed the case with prejudice.
The settlement approval and dismissal affect Mahabir Mahabir, also known as Randolph Mahabir, Queens Dollar, Inc., doing business as 99 Cents Rush, and the other defendants.
What happened
Mahabir v. Queens Dollar, Inc. was a case seeking damages under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law. The parties asked the court to approve their settlement.
The court reviewed the settlement and considered the risks and costs of continuing the case, possible recovery, bargaining, attorneys’ fees, and possible fraud or collusion. It found the agreement fair and reasonable.
Judge Robert W. Lehrburger approved the settlement and dismissed and discontinued the entire case with prejudice, without costs or fees to any party except as provided in the settlement agreement. The court also directed the Clerk to close the case.
The detailed version
- Mahabir v. Queens Dollar, Inc. · No. 1:19-cv-09395
- Robert Lehrburger
- Apr. 12, 2021
Background
Mahabir Mahabir, also known as Randolph Mahabir, sued Queens Dollar, Inc., doing business as 99 Cents Rush, and other defendants. The action sought damages under the Fair Labor Standards Act, a federal wage-and-hour law, and the New York Labor Law. The parties jointly asked the court to approve their Settlement Agreement and Release of Claims, which they submitted on April 12, 2021.
Settlement Review
The court explained that it had to determine whether the settlement was fair and reasonable and resulted from arm’s-length negotiations rather than employer overreaching. The court had assisted with mediation and reviewed the settlement agreement and the parties’ letter. It considered, among other things, prior proceedings, the risks and costs of continuing the case, possible recovery, the bargaining process, attorneys’ fees, and the possibility of fraud or collusion.
The court noted that the agreement contained no confidentiality restrictions, that its mutual non-disparagement provision allowed truthful statements, that the release was narrowly limited to wage-and-hour claims, and that the attorneys’ fees were within a fair and reasonable range.
Ruling
The court found the Settlement Agreement fair and reasonable and approved it. Because the case was resolved by settlement, the court dismissed and discontinued it in its entirety, with prejudice, without costs or fees to any party except as provided in the settlement agreement. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate all motions and deadlines and close the case.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.