Opinion
No. 2021-07782 Index No. 616170/19
05-22-2024
Fredis Ramires, et al., respondents, v. AGDG Car Wash Corp., et al., appellants.
Law Offices of Paul D. Stone, P.C., Tarrytown, NY, for appellants. Monteiro & Fishman LLP, Hempstead, NY (Marcus Monteiro of counsel), for respondents.
Law Offices of Paul D. Stone, P.C., Tarrytown, NY, for appellants.
Monteiro & Fishman LLP, Hempstead, NY (Marcus Monteiro of counsel), for respondents.
COLLEEN D. DUFFY, J.P., ROBERT J. MILLER, DEBORAH A. DOWLING, CARL J. LANDICINO, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER
In a class action, inter alia, to recover damages for violations of Labor Law article 6, the defendants appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Denise Sher, J.), entered October 7, 2021. The judgment, upon an order of the same court dated July 22, 2021, granting the plaintiffs' motion for an award of attorneys' fees, and after a hearing, is in favor of counsel for the plaintiffs and against the defendants in the total sum of $205,800.
ORDERED that the judgment is reversed, on the law, with costs, the plaintiffs' motion for an award of attorneys' fees is denied, and the order is modified accordingly.
In this class action, the plaintiffs, inter alia, sought to recover damages for violations of Labor Law article 6. On January 18, 2021, the defendants served the plaintiffs with an offer of compromise pursuant to CPLR 3221 to settle the action for the sum of $150,000, including costs accrued to the date of the offer. The plaintiffs accepted the offer, and a judgment in the total amount of $150,000 was entered on February 8, 2021. The plaintiffs' subsequently moved for an award of attorneys' fees. In an order dated July 22, 2021, the Supreme Court granted the plaintiffs' motion and directed that a hearing be held to determine the amount of the attorneys' fees. After a hearing, the court entered a judgment in favor of counsel for the plaintiffs and against the defendants awarding attorneys' fees in the total sum of $205,800.
"Under the general rule, attorneys' fees and disbursements are incidents of litigation and the prevailing party may not collect them from the loser unless an award is authorized by agreement between the parties or by statute or court rule" (Matter of A.G. Ship Maintenance Corp. v Lezak, 69 N.Y.2d 1, 5; see City of Buffalo v Clement Co., 28 N.Y.2d 241, 262-263). When "'there [i]s no express reservation of rights with respect to the derivative issue of attorneys' fees, it must be deemed to have been waived and subsumed in the negotiated settlement'" (Gaisi v Gaisi, 48 A.D.3d 744, 745, quoting Harmir Realty Co. v Tesa, 2003 NY Slip Op 50015[U], *2 [App Term, 1st Dept]).
In this case, the plaintiffs agreed to a settlement by offer of compromise without expressly reserving their rights to an award of attorneys' fees (see Gaisi v Gaisi, 48 A.D.3d 744). Accordingly, the Supreme Court erred in granting the plaintiffs' motion for an award of attorneys' fees.
In light of our determination, we need not reach the remaining issues raised by the parties.
DUFFY, J.P., MILLER, DOWLING and LANDICINO, JJ., concur.