Garcia v. 3662 Broadway Restaurant Corp.
- Stewart Aaron
- 1:19-cv-08297-SDA
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Garcia v. 3662 Broadway Restaurant Corp., Magistrate Judge Aaron approved the FLSA settlement, fees, and dismissal with prejudice.
Alfredo Garcia, the defendants, and their attorneys are affected by the approved settlement and dismissal. The action was dismissed with prejudice, and the court retained jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement.
What happened
In Garcia v. 3662 Broadway Restaurant Corp., Alfredo Garcia brought claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act, including claims on behalf of similarly situated people. The parties reached a settlement in principle after a settlement conference and submitted the proposed agreement to the court.
The court found the settlement fair and reasonable, considering the nature and scope of Garcia’s individual claims and the risks and costs of further litigation. It also found the requested $10,766.18 in attorney’s fees and costs fair and reasonable, while making no finding about counsel’s hourly rates.
Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron approved the settlement, dismissed the action with prejudice and without costs except as provided in the settlement agreement, retained jurisdiction to enforce the agreement, and directed the clerk to close the case.
The detailed version
- Garcia v. 3662 Broadway Restaurant Corp. · No. 1:19-cv-08297-SDA
- Stewart Aaron
- Sept. 20, 2022
Background
This action included claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Alfredo Garcia sued individually and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated. The parties appeared before Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron for a settlement conference on August 18, 2022, and reached a settlement in principle. The parties had consented to the referral of the case to Judge Aaron for disposition.
The court directed the parties to submit the settlement agreement and explain why the settlement, including any attorney’s fees and costs, was fair, reasonable, and adequate under the required review standard. The parties submitted the proposed agreement and related papers on August 19 and 20, 2022.
Court’s Analysis
After reviewing the proposed settlement, the court found it fair and reasonable in light of the nature and scope of Garcia’s individual claims and the risks and expenses of further litigation.
Garcia requested $10,766.18 in attorney’s fees and costs, described as one-third of the total settlement amount plus costs. The court noted that courts in the district typically approve attorney’s fees equal to one-third of the total recovery and regularly award multipliers of two to six times the lodestar, which was calculated here as $7,050. The court found the requested fees fair and reasonable but expressly made no finding about the reasonableness of counsel’s hourly rates.
Disposition
The court approved the settlement. It dismissed the action with prejudice and without costs except as provided in the settlement agreement. The court retained jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement and directed the Clerk of Court to close the case.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.