Mazzara v. Kill Dare, Corp.
- Edgardo Ramos
- 1:20-cv-09181
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 5
In Mazzara v. Kill Dare, Judge Ramos approved the FLSA settlement and dismissed the case with prejudice.
Iolanda Mazzara, Kill Dare, Corp., and Joseph Juliano were affected by the approved settlement; the case was dismissed with prejudice, and Mazzara was to receive $10,954.53 after the approved attorneys’ fees and costs.
What happened
Mazzara v. Kill Dare, Corp. involved Iolanda Mazzara’s putative class and collective action against Kill Dare, Corp. and Joseph Juliano. She alleged that the defendants violated federal and New York wage laws by failing to pay the required minimum wage, making improper deductions, retaining tips, and violating other wage-payment and notice requirements.
The parties asked the court to approve a $17,000 settlement. After attorneys’ fees of $5,477.26 and costs of $568.20, Mazzara would receive $10,954.53. The defendants disputed her damages calculations and said they had no record that she worked for Allure; the parties also identified unavailable evidence and litigation risks.
Judge Edgardo Ramos found that the settlement, attorneys’ fees and costs, release, and other provisions were fair and reasonable. He granted the motion for settlement approval and dismissed the case with prejudice, directing the clerk to terminate the motion and close the case.
The detailed version
- Mazzara v. Kill Dare, Corp. · No. 1:20-cv-09181
- Edgardo Ramos
- Oct. 28, 2021
Background
Iolanda Mazzara brought a putative class and collective action against Kill Dare, Corp., doing business as Allure, and Joseph Juliano. She alleged violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), New York Labor Law, and related New York State Department of Labor regulations. The alleged violations included failure to pay the lawful minimum wage, improper wage deductions, unlawful retention of tips, failure to pay spread-of-hours premiums, late wage payments, and defective wage notices and wage statements.
The parties jointly moved for approval of their settlement. The court explained that FLSA claims generally cannot be privately settled with prejudice without approval by the court or the Department of Labor. The court therefore evaluated whether the agreement was fair and reasonable under the circumstances.
Settlement Amount and Recovery
The agreement provided for a total recovery of $17,000. Mazzara’s counsel sought $5,477.26 in attorneys’ fees, described as one third of the settlement, plus $568.20 in costs. Mazzara would receive $10,954.53 after those deductions.
Mazzara estimated that her possible recovery ranged from $0 to $55,976.68. She calculated $18,460.34 in unpaid wages, tips, and improper deductions, and also claimed liquidated damages, damages for late payments, and statutory damages for invalid wage notices and wage statements. The opinion states that, under the settlement, she would recover 92% of her claimed unpaid wages before attorneys’ fees and costs.
The defendants disputed Mazzara’s calculations and maintained that they had no record of her working for Allure, which they argued meant she was not entitled to damages. The parties also agreed that some evidence was unavailable and that proceeding with the litigation therefore involved significant risk. The court concluded that the settlement resolved genuine disputes and represented a reasonable compromise.
Attorneys’ Fees and Costs
The court approved the requested fees and costs. Counsel submitted records showing 33.8 hours of work at a $400 hourly rate, producing a lodestar of $13,520. A lodestar is the reasonable hourly rate multiplied by the reasonable number of hours worked. The requested $5,477.26 fee was less than half of that lodestar. The court also found the $568.20 in costs, consisting of the electronic filing fee and service-of-process costs, reasonable.
Other Settlement Terms
The court found the remaining provisions fair and reasonable. The agreement did not contain objectionable confidentiality or non-disparagement provisions. Its wage-and-hour release covered only claims brought, or that could have been brought, in this action under the FLSA, New York Labor Law, and related regulations and statutes. The mutual non-disparagement clause was permissible because it included an exception for truthful statements.
Disposition
The court found the proposed settlement agreement fair and reasonable and approved it. The court granted the motion for settlement approval and dismissed the case with prejudice. The clerk was directed to terminate the motion and close the case.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.