Vences Estrada v. Touba General Discount, Inc.
- Barbara Moses
- 1:21-cv-05134
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
Judge Moses approved Vences Estrada v. Touba General Discount’s wage settlement and dismissed the action with prejudice and without costs.
Oscar Vences Estrada and the defendants, including Touba General Discount, Inc.; the settlement resolves the action and the case was closed.
What happened
In Vences Estrada v. Touba General Discount, Inc., the parties asked Judge Barbara Moses to approve their settlement of Oscar Vences Estrada’s claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law. The settlement resulted from bargaining at a court-supervised conference.
The defendants agreed to pay $36,000. Plaintiff’s counsel would receive $12,492 for fees and expenses, leaving $23,508 for Estrada. The court found the financial and other terms fair and reasonable, considering the possible recovery, litigation risks, mutual releases, and the absence of confidentiality or reemployment restrictions.
Judge Barbara Moses granted the parties’ joint letter-motion and approved the settlement. She ordered the action dismissed with prejudice and without costs, and directed the Clerk of Court to close the case.
The detailed version
- Vences Estrada v. Touba General Discount, Inc. · No. 1:21-cv-05134
- Barbara Moses
- May 17, 2022
Background
The parties submitted a joint letter-motion asking the court to approve a fully executed settlement agreement under the requirement for court review of certain Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) settlements. The agreement settled Oscar Vences Estrada’s claims under the FLSA and the New York Labor Law. The parties negotiated the material terms during a judicially supervised settlement conference on April 7, 2022, and later consented to Judge Moses’s jurisdiction for all purposes.
Settlement Terms
The defendants collectively agreed to pay $36,000. Plaintiff’s counsel would receive $12,492 for attorneys’ fees and expenses, leaving $23,508 for Estrada. The court noted that the settlement was below Estrada’s estimated maximum recovery of as much as $190,000, including liquidated damages, but that litigation risks could have prevented recovery of that amount. The defendants’ records stated that Estrada was paid hourly at minimum wage and with overtime, while the defendants acknowledged possible liability under New York law for spread-of-hours pay, wage-statement violations, and deductions for meal breaks.
The agreement included mutual general releases. The court found those releases appropriate because the action was not a class action, Estrada was represented by counsel, and he was no longer employed by the defendants. The agreement did not prohibit rehiring and did not contain a confidentiality clause or another restriction on discussing the employment, the action, or the settlement terms. Counsel’s fee award represented one-third of the net settlement after deducting $739 in costs, which counsel would also receive as reimbursement, and was below counsel’s stated lodestar of $16,682.50.
Ruling
Judge Barbara Moses found the financial and nonfinancial terms fair and reasonable. The court granted the parties’ joint letter-motion and approved the proposed settlement. It 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.