Vasquez v. MobileShack Inc.
- Paul Engelmayer
- 1:19-cv-10371
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Vasquez v. MobileShack Inc., Judge Engelmayer approved a fair and reasonable wage-settlement agreement and closed the case.
The settlement affects the plaintiffs and defendants in the wage-and-labor-law action, and provides attorney’s fees and costs to plaintiffs’ attorney Bart Pittari.
What happened
Vasquez v. MobileShack Inc. was a case under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law. The parties submitted a proposed settlement agreement, and the court reviewed it.
Under the agreement, the defendants would pay $43,381.24 to the plaintiffs, $20,881.24 in attorney’s fees to plaintiffs’ attorney Bart Pittari, and $3,237.52 in filing and service costs. The court found that the agreement was reached through fair procedures and was fair and reasonable.
Judge Paul A. Engelmayer approved the agreement under the standard used for Fair Labor Standards Act settlements. The court directed the Clerk to end all pending motions and close the case.
The detailed version
- Vasquez v. MobileShack Inc. · No. 1:19-cv-10371
- Paul Engelmayer
- Feb. 6, 2024
Background
The plaintiffs brought an action under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law. On February 2, 2024, the parties submitted a proposed settlement agreement to the court.
Settlement Terms
Under the agreement, the defendants agreed to pay $43,381.24 to the plaintiffs. The agreement also provided for $20,881.24 in attorney’s fees to plaintiffs’ attorney, Bart Pittari, plus $3,237.52 in filing and service costs. The court stated that the agreement allocated less than one third of the settlement amount, after costs, to plaintiffs’ counsel as attorney’s fees.
Court’s Ruling
The court concluded that the settlement was fair and reasonable and had been reached through procedurally fair means. It found that the agreement satisfied the standard for reviewing Fair Labor Standards Act settlements described in Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc. The court therefore approved the agreement.
The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate all pending motions and close the case. This order approved the settlement; the opinion does not describe a decision on the underlying claims’ merits.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.