Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 15, 2023

Alonzo v. Peekskill Automotive Inc.

Judge
Vincent Briccetti
Docket
7:22-cv-05486
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
FlsaEmploymentCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Alonzo v. Peekskill Automotive, Judge Briccetti approved the parties’ Fair Labor Standards Act settlement and closed the case.

Who this affects

Jose Alvarez Alonzo and Peekskill Automotive Inc.; the approved settlement resolves the filed case and addresses Alonzo’s FLSA and New York Labor Law claims.

What happened

In Jose Alvarez Alonzo v. Peekskill Automotive Inc., the parties submitted a settlement agreement in a dispute under the Fair Labor Standards Act and related New York wage law claims. Alonzo was represented by an attorney experienced in wage and employment matters.

The court considered the parties’ information about the claimed unpaid overtime, the defendant’s financial condition, mediation, the scope of the release, and the absence of a confidentiality requirement. The agreement provided for a total payment of $22,000, and the court found the settlement fair, reasonable, and reached without fraud or collusion. The court also found that attorney’s fees equal to 40% of Alonzo’s total recovery, plus reimbursement of costs, were fair and reasonable.

Judge Vincent L. Briccetti approved the settlement agreement, canceled the scheduled case-management conference, and directed the Clerk to close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Alonzo v. Peekskill Automotive Inc. · No. 7:22-cv-05486
Judge
Vincent Briccetti
Date
June 15, 2023

Background

Jose Alvarez Alonzo brought this wage-and-hour case under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The parties filed a settlement agreement and a statement explaining its basis, as required for court review of an FLSA settlement under the cited Second Circuit decision.

Settlement Review

The court reviewed the proposed agreement as a whole. It considered Alonzo’s statement that his initial damages estimate was based on memory rather than documented time records; the defendant’s evidence that the unpaid overtime was likely less than alleged; and the parties’ assessment, reached with help from a mediator, that $22,000 was fair in light of the evidence and the defendant’s financial condition.

The court also considered that Alonzo had experienced FLSA and employment counsel, that a neutral mediator assisted and encouraged the settlement, that the release was not overly broad, that the agreement had no confidentiality requirement, and that the parties wanted to avoid the costs and uncertainty of continued litigation. The released claims were limited to FLSA and New York Labor Law claims.

Attorney’s Fees

After reviewing counsel’s billing records and related information, the court found reasonable the attorney’s fees equal to 40% of Alonzo’s total recovery, together with reimbursement of costs.

Ruling and Disposition

The court found that the settlement was fair and reasonable and resulted from arm’s-length negotiations rather than fraud or collusion. Judge Vincent L. Briccetti approved the settlement agreement, canceled the June 27, 2023 case-management conference, and directed the Clerk to close the case.

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.