Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 30, 2021

Solis v. Orthonet LLC

Judge
Vernon Broderick
Docket
1:19-cv-04678
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
10
Fee PetitionEmployment
In one sentence

In Solis v. Orthonet LLC, Judge Broderick granted plaintiffs’ unopposed motion for $1 million in attorneys’ fees and $9,997.67 in costs.

Who this affects

Plaintiffs’ counsel received the approved $1,000,000 fee award and $9,997.67 in costs and expenses in connection with the $3,000,000 settlement reached for the plaintiffs and proposed class and collective members.

What happened

In Solis v. Orthonet LLC, former OrthoNet employees Joanna Solis and Maura Lyons alleged that the company wrongly classified them as exempt from overtime-pay requirements under federal and New York law. The parties reached a $3 million settlement, and the court had previously approved it.

The plaintiffs’ lawyers asked for $1 million in fees, equal to one-third of the settlement, plus $9,997.67 for costs and expenses. The court considered the work performed, the case’s complexity and risks, the quality of the representation, the relationship between the fees and settlement, public-policy concerns, and a comparison to the lawyers’ time-based billing.

Judge Broderick found the requested fees and costs reasonable and granted the plaintiffs’ unopposed motion for attorneys’ fees and costs.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Solis v. Orthonet LLC · No. 1:19-cv-04678
Judge
Vernon Broderick
Date
June 30, 2021

Background

Joanna Solis and Maura Lyons sued OrthoNet LLC under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law. They alleged that OrthoNet improperly classified them as exempt employees and therefore denied them overtime wages. The action was brought individually and on behalf of other similarly situated employees.

The parties attended mediation on January 13, 2020, and reached a settlement. The court later granted the plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary approval of the settlement, proposed classes, notice, and related appointments. The plaintiffs then filed an unopposed motion for attorneys’ fees and costs.

Fee Request

Plaintiffs’ counsel requested $1,000,000 in attorneys’ fees, representing one-third of the $3,000,000 gross settlement fund. Counsel also requested $9,997.67 in litigation costs and expenses, including filing, mediation, travel, and research fees.

The court explained that attorneys’ fees in a class action may be calculated using either the percentage-of-recovery method or the lodestar method. Under the lodestar method, the court multiplies the reasonable hours worked by a reasonable hourly rate. The court used the percentage method here and cross-checked the result against the lodestar.

Court’s Analysis

The court found the one-third fee reasonable. It considered the lawyers’ reported 830 hours of work and a lodestar amount of $420,000; the complexity of combining a state-law class action with a federal wage-law collective action; the risks of continued litigation and the contingent-fee arrangement; the quality of the representation; the relationship between the requested fee and the settlement; and public-policy considerations supporting enforcement of wage protections.

The requested fee produced a lodestar multiplier of 2.37. The court stated that multipliers of two to six times the lodestar are typically used and found a 2.37 multiplier appropriate under the circumstances. The court also found the requested litigation expenses reasonable and reimbursable.

Disposition

Judge Vernon S. Broderick granted the plaintiffs’ unopposed motion for attorneys’ fees and costs.

The authoritative version

Read the full 10-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.