Heras v. CT Custom Home Builders LLC
- Judith McCarthy
- 7:23-cv-04166
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Heras v. CT Custom Home Builders, Judge McCarthy approved the parties’ settlement and dismissed the case with prejudice.
Fabian Heras, CT Custom Home Builders LLC, Carlos A. Tenezaca, and Heras’s counsel were affected by the approved settlement, attorney’s-fee approval, and dismissal with prejudice.
What happened
Fabian Heras sued CT Custom Home Builders LLC and Carlos A. Tenezaca, alleging violations of federal wage law and New York labor law. The parties later submitted a settlement agreement for the court’s approval.
The court reviewed the agreement, the parties’ early settlement discussions, and the risks and costs of continuing the case. After asking whether Heras understood how the settlement proceeds would be distributed, the court received an affidavit confirming his understanding and approval. The court also found that the agreement’s approval of his counsel’s fees at 33% was fair and reasonable.
Judge Judith C. McCarthy approved the settlement agreement, dismissed the matter with prejudice, directed the Clerk to terminate the pending motion, and closed the case.
The detailed version
- Heras v. CT Custom Home Builders LLC · No. 7:23-cv-04166
- Judith McCarthy
- Apr. 8, 2024
Background
Fabian Heras brought the action against CT Custom Home Builders LLC and Carlos A. Tenezaca. He alleged violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act, a federal wage law, and the New York Labor Law. The parties consented to the jurisdiction of Judith C. McCarthy, a United States Magistrate Judge, for all purposes.
On March 5, 2024, the parties submitted a Settlement Agreement and General Release, a motion asking the court to approve it, and an affidavit describing attorney’s fees, hourly rates, tasks, and costs. During a March 22 telephone conference, the court asked whether Heras understood how the settlement proceeds would be distributed because the agreement was unclear on that point. His counsel confirmed that Heras understood the distribution amounts. The court then directed Heras to submit an affidavit, which he filed on March 25 and which stated his understanding and approval of the distribution.
Settlement Review
The court considered whether the proposed settlement was fair and reasonable under the circumstances. It noted that the parties had engaged in early settlement discussions and sought to resolve the case before extensive discovery. The court determined that this approach conserved attorney time and judicial resources. Based on its review of the record, the court found that the agreement—including approval of Heras’s counsel’s fees in the amount of 33%—was a fair and reasonable resolution of the case.
Disposition
The court approved the Settlement Agreement and dismissed the matter with prejudice. It also directed the Clerk to terminate the pending motion at Docket No. 35 and close the case.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.