Ramirez Coyotecalt v. 23RD & 9TH Restaurant Corp.
- Stewart Aaron
- 1:23-cv-03614
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Ramirez Coyotecalt v. 23rd & 9th Restaurant Corp., Magistrate Judge Aaron approved the wage settlement and dismissed the action with prejudice.
The plaintiffs and defendants are bound by the approved settlement, including its limited wage-and-hour release and attorney-fee provisions. The case was dismissed with prejudice, and the court retained jurisdiction to enforce the agreement.
What happened
In Ramirez Coyotecalt v. 23rd & 9th Restaurant Corp., the parties reached a settlement of claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law and asked the court to approve it.
The court reviewed the settlement, including its release of wage-and-hour claims and the requested $33,601.33 in attorney’s fees and costs. It found the settlement and fees fair and reasonable, while making no finding about the reasonableness of counsel’s hourly rates.
Magistrate Judge Aaron approved the settlement, dismissed the action with prejudice, and retained jurisdiction to enforce the agreement. The Clerk was asked to close the case.
The detailed version
- Ramirez Coyotecalt v. 23RD & 9TH Restaurant Corp. · No. 1:23-cv-03614
- Stewart Aaron
- Apr. 2, 2024
Background
The plaintiffs asserted claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), a federal wage law, and the New York Labor Law (NYLL). After court-ordered mediation, the mediator reported that the parties had reached agreement on all issues. The court initially dismissed the action, then granted the parties’ request to reopen the case so they could submit their settlement for approval.
The parties filed the settlement agreement, a damages chart, records concerning attorney’s fees and costs, retainer agreements, and the plaintiffs’ confessions of judgment. A confession of judgment is an agreement allowing a judgment to be entered under specified circumstances. The parties also corrected a typographical error in the settlement materials.
Settlement approval
Because the case included FLSA claims, the court reviewed the settlement under the standard requiring the agreement to be fair and reasonable. The court approved the settlement.
The agreement released claims against the defendants and various related people and entities, but only for wage-and-hour allegations arising during the period involved in the lawsuit. The court found that limitation sufficiently narrow and reasonable because it was not a general release of unrelated claims.
The plaintiffs also sought approval of $33,601.33 in attorney’s fees and costs from the settlement fund. The request represented one-third of the total settlement amount and was approximately 4.36 times counsel’s stated lodestar of $7,680. A lodestar is the amount calculated from the reasonable time worked multiplied by the applicable hourly rate. The court found the requested fees fair and reasonable, but expressly made no findings about whether counsel’s hourly rates were reasonable.
Disposition
The court ordered that the action be dismissed with prejudice and without costs except as provided in the settlement agreement. It retained jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement and directed the Clerk of Court to close the case. The order approved the settlement and resolved the case without deciding the underlying wage claims after trial or summary judgment.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.