Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 26, 2024

Collado v. 216 Realty Associates LLC

Judge
Rearden
Docket
1:22-cv-10600
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
FlsaCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Collado v. 216 Realty Associates LLC, Judge Rearden approved a $150,000 Fair Labor Standards Act settlement and dismissed the case with prejudice.

Who this affects

Jahaira Collado, 216 Realty Associates LLC and the other defendants, and Collado’s counsel, Colin Mulholland. The settlement allocated $100,050 to Collado and $49,950 to her counsel for fees and costs.

What happened

In Collado v. 216 Realty Associates LLC, the parties told the court they had settled Jahaira Collado’s Fair Labor Standards Act claims.

The proposed settlement provided $150,000 total: $100,050 for Collado and $49,950 for her lawyer, Colin Mulholland, for fees and costs. The court found the agreement fair and reasonable.

Judge Jennifer H. Rearden approved the settlement and dismissed the case with prejudice, meaning it cannot be refiled. The court kept jurisdiction only to resolve disputes about the settlement agreement.

The detailed version

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

Case
Collado v. 216 Realty Associates LLC · No. 1:22-cv-10600
Judge
Rearden
Date
Feb. 26, 2024

Background

The parties informed the court that they had reached a settlement in this Fair Labor Standards Act case. They submitted the proposed agreement for court approval.

Settlement Terms

The proposed settlement called for an aggregate payment of $150,000 in connection with Jahaira Collado’s Fair Labor Standards Act claims. The agreement allocated $100,050 to Collado and $49,950—one-third of the total—to her counsel, Colin Mulholland, for attorney’s fees and costs.

Ruling

The court reviewed the proposed settlement and found it fair and reasonable under the legal standard from Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc. Judge Jennifer H. Rearden therefore approved the settlement and dismissed the case with prejudice. The court retained jurisdiction solely to resolve disputes arising from the settlement agreement and the settlement of the action. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.