Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 14, 2022

Rahman v. July 96 Corp.

Judge
Analisa Torres
Docket
1:21-cv-09649
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Fee PetitionCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Rahman v. July 96 Corp., Judge Torres required plaintiffs’ counsel to submit billing records before deciding settlement approval and attorneys’ fees.

Who this affects

The order directly affects the plaintiffs’ counsel, who must provide billing records, and the plaintiffs’ settlement and attorneys’ fee request. It also concerns the defendants because they are parties to the settlement-approval motion.

What happened

In Rahman v. July 96 Corp., the court reviewed the parties’ request for approval of a settlement involving Mohammad Rahman and Jose Vargas and the defendants.

The court ordered the plaintiffs’ lawyers to submit billing records by June 17, 2022, to support their request for attorneys’ fees. The records had to show each lawyer’s date, hours worked, and work performed.

Judge Analisa Torres stated that the court would not approve an attorneys’ fee award without this documentation. The order does not state whether the court approved or denied the settlement motion.

The detailed version

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

Case
Rahman v. July 96 Corp. · No. 1:21-cv-09649
Judge
Analisa Torres
Date
June 14, 2022

Background

Mohammad Rahman and Jose Vargas sued July 96 Corp., Melitios Meletiou, and Fanis Tsiamtsiouris. The court reviewed the parties’ motion seeking approval of a settlement. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or the proposed settlement’s terms.

Order

The court required the plaintiffs’ counsel to submit contemporaneous billing records by June 17, 2022, supporting the request for attorneys’ fees. The records had to document, for each attorney, the date of the work, the hours spent, and the nature of the work performed.

Ruling and effect

Judge Analisa Torres stated that the court would not approve an attorneys’ fee award without the required documentation. The order does not state whether the settlement itself, or the requested fee award, was ultimately approved or denied.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.