Polanco v. Mighty Bowl LLC
- Katharine Parker
- 1:23-cv-06376
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Polanco v. Mighty Bowl LLC, Judge Parker approved the settlement and discontinued the action with prejudice and without costs.
Karla Polanco, the defendants, and the people she sought to represent in the action; the settlement also addressed compensation for Polanco’s counsel.
What happened
In Polanco v. Mighty Bowl LLC, Karla Polanco brought claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law, individually and for others similarly situated. The defendants are Mighty Bowl LLC, Mighty Bowl 2 LLC, Mighty Bowl 3 LLC, and Dwayne Gotua.
The parties reached an agreement in principle and asked the court to approve their proposed settlement. The court reviewed the agreement and the parties’ submissions, including Polanco’s explanation of why the settlement was fair, reasonable, and adequate. The opinion does not describe the settlement’s financial or other specific terms.
Judge Katharine H. Parker approved the settlement, including compensation for Polanco’s claims and her lawyer’s fees. The court retained jurisdiction to enforce the agreement if necessary, discontinued the action with prejudice and without costs, and directed the Clerk of Court to close the case.
The detailed version
- Polanco v. Mighty Bowl LLC · No. 1:23-cv-06376
- Katharine Parker
- May 3, 2024
Background
Karla Polanco sued Mighty Bowl LLC, Mighty Bowl 2 LLC, Mighty Bowl 3 LLC, and Dwayne Gotua under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law. She brought the action individually and on behalf of others similarly situated. The parties consented to the court’s authority under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).
The parties reached an agreement in principle to resolve the action and submitted a proposed settlement for judicial approval. Polanco also submitted a letter explaining why she considered the agreement fair, reasonable, and adequate. The opinion does not state the settlement amount or describe its detailed terms.
Court’s Analysis
Because the action included claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act, the court reviewed the proposed settlement for fairness. The court considered the parties’ submissions, the terms of the proposed agreement, and the totality of the relevant circumstances.
Ruling
The court found that the settlement was fair, reasonable, and adequate both to address Polanco’s claims and to compensate her counsel for legal fees. The court therefore approved the agreement.
The court also retained jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement if necessary. As a result of approving the settlement, the action was discontinued with prejudice and without costs. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.