Weng v. New Shanghai Deluxe Corp
- Edgardo Ramos
- 1:19-cv-09596
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 6
In Weng v. New Shanghai Deluxe Corp, Judge Ramos granted plaintiffs’ fee motion, awarding $69,830 in fees, $2,960.30 in costs, and authorizing damages.
Jie Weng and San Dang Wang received authorized damages, and their counsel received $69,830 in attorney fees and $2,960.30 in costs. The named defendants are affected by the authorized damages judgment and the fee-and-cost award.
What happened
In Weng v. New Shanghai Deluxe Corp, Jie Weng and San Dang Wang sued their former employers under federal and New York wage laws. After a one-day trial, the court had found that Rong Yang Zhu was also an employer under those laws, and the plaintiffs succeeded on all their claims.
The plaintiffs’ lawyers requested $70,092.50 in attorney fees and $2,960.30 in costs. The defendants did not oppose the request. Judge Ramos reviewed the proposed hourly rates and work hours, reduced two hourly rates, and found the documented costs recoverable.
Judge Ramos granted the fee motion. The court awarded $69,830 in attorney fees and $2,960.30 in costs, authorized judgment for agreed damages of $609,075.65 for Jie Weng and $452,305.18 for San Dang Wang, and directed the clerk to close the case.
The detailed version
- Weng v. New Shanghai Deluxe Corp · No. 1:19-cv-09596
- Edgardo Ramos
- Mar. 13, 2024
Background
Jie Weng and San Dang Wang brought claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law against New Shanghai Deluxe Corp, Yeah Shanghai Deluxe Inc, Yu Lin Zhu, Mei Fang Wu, Rong Bing Zhu, Rong Yang Zhu, Yu Jun Zhu, and Wei Chen. The opinion states that the plaintiffs alleged they were not paid minimum wage, overtime, or spread-of-hours compensation and were not given required wage notices and wage statements.
At a one-day bench trial on September 7, 2022, defense counsel represented that the defendants did not dispute those allegations. Defense counsel also conceded that the defendants kept no records of the plaintiffs’ hours or pay and that the plaintiffs worked six days per week and more than 60 hours per week. The only disputed issue was whether Rong Yang Zhu was an employer. In an earlier opinion dated October 7, 2022, the court concluded that Rong Yang Zhu was a joint employer under both the federal and New York wage laws.
Fee Motion
Plaintiffs’ counsel requested $70,092.50 in attorney fees and $2,960.30 in costs. The defendants filed no opposition. Under both wage laws, a prevailing plaintiff may recover reasonable attorney fees and costs. The court calculated the fee using the reasonable hourly rate multiplied by the reasonable hours worked, while also considering the plaintiffs’ degree of success.
The requested attorneys’ hourly rates were $450 for Vincent Wong, $350 for Michael Brand, $325 for Eugene Kroner, and $150 for paralegal Joe Chen. The court approved Wong’s and Brand’s requested rates. It reduced Kroner’s rate to $300 because the submission did not establish that a higher rate was reasonable for him or a similarly experienced attorney. It reduced Chen’s rate to $125, consistent with rates the court found reasonable for paralegals.
The court approved all 191.6 hours claimed. It found the hours reasonable because the case proceeded to a one-day bench trial, even though most of the case settled shortly before trial, and counsel had prepared for numerous potentially disputed issues. The court also found that the plaintiffs had succeeded on all their claims and therefore made no additional reduction for the degree of success.
Calculation and Disposition
The court calculated the fee award as follows:
- 50.8 hours by Wong at $450 per hour: $22,860 - 130.3 hours by Brand at $350 per hour: $45,605 - 0.3 hours by Kroner at $300 per hour: $90 - 10.2 hours by Chen at $125 per hour: $1,275
The resulting attorney-fee award was $69,830. The court also approved $2,960.30 in documented costs for court filings, service of process, translation services, and deposition costs.
The court granted the motion for attorney fees. Plaintiffs’ counsel was awarded $69,830 in attorney fees and $2,960.30 in costs, totaling $72,790.30. The court also authorized entry of judgment for agreed damages of $609,075.65 for Jie Weng and $452,305.18 for San Dang Wang. The clerk was directed to terminate the motion and close the case.
Read the full 6-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.