Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 1, 2023

Goudarzi v. Seasons A Floral Design Studio

Judge
Paul Engelmayer
Docket
1:22-cv-02808
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
FlsaEmploymentCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Goudarzi v. Seasons A Floral Design Studio, Judge Engelmayer approved the parties’ signed $30,000 wage-law settlement.

Who this affects

Hamed Goudarzi, Seasons A Floral Design Studio, Luis Daniel Munoz, and Goudarzi’s attorney, Alan Ripka & Associates, LLP.

What happened

Goudarzi v. Seasons A Floral Design Studio is a case under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law. The parties submitted a proposed settlement for court approval.

The revised agreement required the defendants to pay Hamed Goudarzi $20,000 and his attorney $10,000 in legal fees. The court had previously found the agreement legally satisfactory but could not approve it because the parties’ signatures were missing.

After the parties filed a properly signed agreement, Judge Paul A. Engelmayer found that it was reached through fair procedures and was fair and reasonable. The court approved the signed agreement.

The detailed version

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

Case
Goudarzi v. Seasons A Floral Design Studio · No. 1:22-cv-02808
Judge
Paul Engelmayer
Date
Feb. 1, 2023

Background

Hamed Goudarzi brought an action under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law against Seasons A Floral Design Studio and Luis Daniel Munoz. The parties submitted a proposed settlement agreement to the court for approval.

On December 9, 2022, the court refused to approve the first proposed agreement and directed the parties to provide additional information. The parties then submitted a revised agreement and a supporting letter.

Settlement Terms

Under the revised agreement, the defendants agreed to pay Goudarzi $20,000. The agreement also provided for $10,000 in attorneys’ fees to Goudarzi’s attorney, Alan Ripka & Associates, LLP. The opinion states that the attorneys’ fees represented one-third of the settlement amount, net of costs.

The court informed the parties on January 19, 2023, that the agreement was legally satisfactory and that it was prepared to approve the $30,000 settlement as substantively reasonable and reached through fair procedures. However, the court could not approve the agreement in its then-current form because it lacked the parties’ signatures.

Ruling

The parties refiled the agreement with the required signatures on January 30, 2023. After reviewing the signed agreement, Judge Paul A. Engelmayer found that it was reached through fair procedures and was fair and reasonable under the standard identified in Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc. The court approved the signed agreement.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.