Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 9, 2024

Cuba v. Shadwick, Inc.

Judge
Edgardo Ramos
Docket
1:23-cv-05329
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
EmploymentCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Cuba v. Shadwick, Inc., Judge Ramos approved a revised wage-and-hour settlement after the parties narrowed its release.

Who this affects

Laura Cuba, the people she represented as similarly situated, and defendants Shadwick Inc. doing business as The Bravest and Michael F. Shadwick.

What happened

In Cuba v. Shadwick, Inc., Laura Cuba brought a wage-and-hour case on behalf of herself and other similarly situated people. She asked the court to approve a proposed settlement.

The court had previously found the settlement amount and requested attorney fees and costs fair and reasonable, but declined to approve the agreement because its release provision covered more than wage-and-hour claims. The revised agreement limited the release to wage-and-hour claims.

Judge Ramos granted Cuba’s motion for settlement approval and directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the motion and close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Cuba v. Shadwick, Inc. · No. 1:23-cv-05329
Judge
Edgardo Ramos
Date
Feb. 9, 2024

Background Laura Cuba filed a wage-and-hour action on June 22, 2023, on behalf of herself and all other persons similarly situated. On November 8, 2023, she moved for approval of the parties’ proposed settlement.

Earlier Settlement Ruling The court previously found that the proposed settlement amount and the requested attorney fees and costs were fair and reasonable. It nevertheless declined to approve the agreement because its release provision was overly broad and was not limited to wage-and-hour claims.

Revised Agreement and Ruling Cuba submitted a second settlement-approval motion with a revised agreement. The revised agreement contained a narrower release limited to wage-and-hour claims. For the reasons stated in its prior opinion, the court granted the motion for settlement approval. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate the motion and 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.