De La Cruz v. Manhattan Parking Group LLC d/b/a Manhattan Parking Group
- Barbara Moses
- 1:20-cv-00977
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 14
In De La Cruz v. Manhattan Parking Group, Judge Moses granted in part counsel’s fee motion, awarding $300,000 plus $6,360.74 in expenses from the settlement fund.
The ruling directly affects Class Counsel and the workers covered by the settlement because it determines how much of the $1.2 million settlement fund will be used for attorneys’ fees and expenses; it also requires defendants to fund the approved payment under the settlement agreement.
What happened
In De La Cruz v. Manhattan Parking Group, workers alleged that parking-garage operators failed to pay them for all hours worked, overtime, and other required compensation under federal and New York wage laws. The case was brought for the named plaintiff and other similarly situated workers.
The parties reached a $1.2 million settlement intended to benefit approximately 1,600 workers. In a separate order, the court approved the settlement, the class representative’s service award, and some administration fees. This opinion addressed only the requested $400,000 in attorneys’ fees and $6,360.74 in expenses.
Judge Barbara Moses granted in part the attorneys’ fee motion. She awarded Class Counsel $300,000 in fees—25% of the settlement fund—and approved reimbursement of the full $6,360.74 in expenses, for a total of $306,360.74 paid from the settlement fund.
The detailed version
- De La Cruz v. Manhattan Parking Group LLC d/b/a Manhattan Parking Group · No. 1:20-cv-00977
- Barbara Moses
- July 12, 2022
Background
Carlos Martin de la Cruz brought a wage-and-hour action under the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law on behalf of himself and other workers. The complaint alleged that defendants’ timekeeping and payroll practices caused parking attendants, car washers, cashiers, and other workers to go unpaid for some hours worked, overtime, and spread-of-hours compensation.
The parties negotiated a $1.2 million settlement covering up to 1,650 class members. The court initially denied preliminary approval because the proposed settlement required workers to submit tax forms before receiving their payments and allowed unclaimed amounts to return to defendants. The parties later changed the agreement to eliminate that requirement. Notices were sent to 1,608 class members; 1,515 were ultimately notified, 18 opted out, and no class member objected.
The court had already approved the settlement and a service award in separate orders. The remaining issue was whether to approve Class Counsel’s request for $400,000 in attorneys’ fees and $6,360.74 in expenses.
Attorneys’ Fees Analysis
The court evaluated the fee request using the percentage-of-the-fund method, checking that result against the lodestar method. The lodestar is the number of hours reasonably worked multiplied by a reasonable hourly rate. The court considered the factors identified in Goldberger, including counsel’s time and labor, the case’s complexity, litigation risk, the quality of representation, the requested fee compared with the settlement, and public-policy considerations.
The court determined that 25% of the $1.2 million settlement fund was a reasonable baseline. It declined to increase that percentage because the case settled before any class or collective-action certification motion was filed, contingency risk was common in wage-and-hour cases, and the recovery was modest compared with Class Counsel’s estimate of total damages. The court also noted that the original settlement structure requiring tax forms would likely have reduced class-member participation and created a reversionary benefit for defendants.
For the lodestar cross-check, Class Counsel reported approximately 241 hours and a self-calculated lodestar of $150,987.50, based on hourly rates ranging from $800 for partners to $275 for paralegals. The court found the hours generally reasonable but found the hourly rates unreasonable, reduced the lodestar by 40% to $90,590.70, and concluded that the resulting fee award reflected a multiplier of approximately 3.31. The court found that multiplier high but not unreasonable enough to require another reduction.
Expenses and Disposition
The court found the requested $6,360.74 in expenses—including filing, investigation, mediation, translation, and travel expenses—reasonable and directly related to the results achieved.
The court therefore GRANTED IN PART the Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Administration Fees. It awarded Class Counsel $300,000 in attorneys’ fees and $6,360.74 in expenses, for a total of $306,360.74, to be paid by or on behalf of defendants from the settlement fund under the settlement agreement.
Read the full 14-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.