Morales v. J & M Deli Corp.
- Edgardo Ramos
- 1:22-cv-04394
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 6
Morales v. J & M Deli Corp.: Judge Ramos approved the parties’ wage settlement and directed that the case be closed.
The order affected Marcos Morales and the defendants—J & M Deli Corp., New 45 Farm Inc. d/b/a 45 Deli, Jin Hwan Oh, and Kim In Yong—by approving their settlement and closing the case.
What happened
In Morales v. J & M Deli Corp., Marcos Morales alleged that J & M Deli Corp., New 45 Farm Inc. d/b/a 45 Deli, Jin Hwan Oh, and Kim In Yong violated federal and New York wage laws by failing to pay required overtime and minimum wages and provide proper wage notices and statements.
The parties proposed a $28,000 settlement. After attorney fees and costs of $10,144, Morales would receive $17,856, which the court said was about 77% of his estimated unpaid wages. The court found the settlement, fees, costs, and other provisions fair and reasonable.
Judge Edgardo Ramos granted the motion to approve the settlement, directed the Clerk to terminate the motion, and ordered the case closed.
The detailed version
- Morales v. J & M Deli Corp. · No. 1:22-cv-04394
- Edgardo Ramos
- Nov. 22, 2023
Background
Marcos Morales sued J & M Deli Corp., New 45 Farm Inc. d/b/a 45 Deli, Jin Hwan Oh, and Kim In Yong under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and the New York Labor Law. He alleged that the defendants did not pay required overtime compensation or the lawful minimum wage and did not provide proper wage notices and wage statements. The parties asked the court to approve their settlement agreement.
Settlement Review
The court explained that FLSA claims cannot be privately settled with prejudice without approval from the district court or the Department of Labor. The court therefore evaluated whether the agreement was fair and reasonable under the circumstances, including the potential recovery, litigation risks and expenses, disputed issues, the parties’ negotiations, and the possibility of fraud or collusion.
The agreement provided for a total recovery of $28,000. Morales’s counsel would receive $8,928 in attorney fees and $1,216 in costs, for a total of $10,144, leaving Morales with $17,856. Morales estimated that he was owed approximately $23,000 in unpaid overtime and minimum wages, excluding attorney fees and costs. The court characterized the settlement as approximately 77% of that estimated back-wage amount and found it reasonable given the disputed number of hours worked, wages received, and other litigation risks.
The court also found the requested attorney fees and costs reasonable. It reviewed billing records for Roman Avshalumov, James O’Donnell, and an unnamed paralegal, including their hourly rates and time entries. The total lodestar—the reasonable hourly rates multiplied by the reasonable hours worked—was $10,350. The requested $8,928 in fees produced a lodestar multiplier of approximately 0.86, which the court accepted.
Other Settlement Terms and Disposition
The court found that the agreement contained no objectionable release, confidentiality, or non-disparagement provisions. The release covered claims under the FLSA and New York Labor Law and claims alleged in the complaint, rather than unrelated claims.
Judge Edgardo Ramos granted the motion to approve the parties’ settlement agreement. The court directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the motion, Doc. 27, and close the case. The opinion approved the settlement; it did not decide whether the defendants were liable on the underlying wage allegations.
Read the full 6-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.