Chitic Cua v. Gochujang LLC
- Jed Rakoff
- 1:20-cv-07735
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 14
In Chitic Cua v. Gochujang LLC, Judge Rakoff approved a $27,500 wage-dispute settlement, including $5,280 in attorney fees and costs.
Tomas Chitic Cua and the defendants identified in the settlement materials, including Mama’s K-Food Inc., Minky Young An, and Junbum Cho; the settlement also concerns CSM Legal, P.C.’s approved attorney fees and costs.
What happened
Chitic Cua v. Gochujang LLC concerned Tomas Chitic Cua’s claims that defendants failed to pay minimum and overtime wages and provide required wage notices and statements. The defendants denied the allegations and raised defenses.
The parties agreed to settle all wage-related claims for $27,500, paid in installments. The agreement provided for $5,280 in attorney fees and costs, a release of the covered claims, and a planned dismissal of the action with prejudice after the initial payment.
The judgment states that Judge Jed S. Rakoff approved the settlement, including the requested attorney fees and costs, for the reasons given in a July 11, 2022 order.
The detailed version
- Chitic Cua v. Gochujang LLC · No. 1:20-cv-07735
- Jed Rakoff
- July 12, 2022
Background
Tomas Chitic Cua sued defendants over alleged wage-and-hour violations. The submitted settlement materials identify the claims as arising under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law. Cua alleged that defendants failed to pay required minimum and overtime wages and failed to provide required wage notices and wage statements. The defendants denied the material allegations and asserted affirmative defenses. The parties described factual and legal disputes about the hours Cua worked and how he was paid.
The settlement materials state that the action was initially brought as a proposed collective action, but Cua never sought certification, so the case did not proceed collectively. The agreement also states that Cua was represented by CSM Legal, P.C., and that defendants were represented by counsel.
Settlement terms
The parties agreed to a total settlement of $27,500. The agreement divided that amount into a $10,000 initial payment, a $10,000 second payment, and a $7,500 final payment. The payments were divided between Cua and CSM Legal, P.C. for attorney fees and costs. The settlement materials requested $5,280 in attorney fees and costs, described as one-third of the settlement amount.
In exchange, Cua agreed to release wage-and-hour claims arising from his employment with the defendants, including claims for unpaid wages, overtime, tips, compensation, liquidated damages, interest, attorney fees, and statutory penalties. The agreement stated that defendants did not admit liability or wrongdoing. It also provided for a dismissal of the action with prejudice and prohibited Cua from refiling the released claims.
Court’s action
The July 12, 2022 judgment states that, for the reasons in the Court’s July 11, 2022 memorandum-endorsed order, “the settlement is approved, including requested attorney’s fees and costs.” The judgment therefore approved the negotiated settlement and the fee-and-cost request. The opinion text provided here does not include the referenced July 11 order’s separate reasoning.
Disposition
The court approved the settlement, including attorney fees and costs. The judgment does not separately state that the court entered the planned dismissal with prejudice; that term appears in the settlement agreement and its proposed dismissal provisions.
Read the full 14-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.