Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 5, 2023

Hernandez v. Il Commendatore Restaurant, Inc.

Judge
Vernon Broderick
Docket
1:22-cv-06038
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
FlsaCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Hernandez v. Il Commendatore, Judge Broderick entered a $70,000 judgment under an offer-of-judgment rule and dismissed the Fair Labor Standards Act case with prejudice.

Who this affects

Dionicio Hernandez and Defendants Il Commendatore Restaurant, Inc. and Adele Gallo. The action was dismissed with prejudice as to the defendants.

What happened

In Hernandez v. Il Commendatore Restaurant, Inc., Dionicio Hernandez brought a proposed collective action under the Fair Labor Standards Act against Il Commendatore Restaurant, Inc. and Adele Gallo. The defendants offered that Hernandez could take a judgment for $70,000.

The court entered judgment for Hernandez in the amount of $70,000, payable 21 days after the judgment was entered. The action was dismissed with prejudice as to the defendants. If the defendants failed to pay on time, they would also have to pay costs and attorneys’ fees connected with enforcing the judgment.

Judge Vernon Broderick said Second Circuit precedent required the court to enter the judgment under the offer-of-judgment rule, even though the court had concerns about avoiding judicial review of Fair Labor Standards Act settlements. The court noted that the submission did not provide attorneys’ fee information or details about waivers or releases, and directed the Clerk to close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Hernandez v. Il Commendatore Restaurant, Inc. · No. 1:22-cv-06038
Judge
Vernon Broderick
Date
Apr. 5, 2023

Background

Dionicio Hernandez sued Il Commendatore Restaurant, Inc. and Adele Gallo on behalf of himself and others similarly situated in a proposed collective action under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The defendants made an offer under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 68, which permits a defending party to offer the opposing party a specified judgment. The offer provided for a total payment of $70,000, payable 21 days after the court entered the offer of judgment.

Court’s Analysis

The court explained that the Second Circuit had held in a prior case that courts do not need to approve Rule 68 offers of judgment resolving FLSA claims. Judge Broderick stated that this precedent required entry of the judgment despite tension with another Second Circuit decision requiring judicial review of typical FLSA settlements.

The court expressed concern that the materials did not disclose the amount of the plaintiff’s attorneys’ fees or what percentage of the total payment those fees represented. The materials also did not describe any waivers or releases, so the court could not evaluate whether they were overly broad. Nevertheless, the court concluded that Second Circuit precedent required it to enter the judgment.

Disposition

The court entered judgment for Dionicio Hernandez against the defendants for $70,000. The action was dismissed with prejudice as against the defendants. If the defendants failed to make a required payment when due, they would be responsible for costs and attorneys’ fees incurred in enforcing the judgment, in addition to the judgment amount and less any payments already made. The Clerk was directed to close the case. The opinion does not report a determination of whether the defendants violated the FLSA on the merits.

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.