Opinion
1:21-cv-05223 (SDA)
03-17-2022
Marcos Ramales, Plaintiff, v. Peace Food Cafe, Inc. et al., Defendants.
ORDER
STEWART D. AARON, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
This case contains claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Following mediation, the parties reached a settlement on all issues. On February 3, 2022, the Court entered an Order directing the parties to provide a copy of the settlement agreement to the Court together with a letter explaining why the settlement, including any provision for attorney's fees and costs, is fair, reasonable and adequate under Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc., 796 F.3d 199, 206 (2d Cir. 2015). (See 2/3/2022 Order, ECF No. 26.) On February 15, 2022 an Order was issued on the parties' consent referring disposition of this matter to the undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). (ECF No. 27.)
On March 15, 2022, the parties submitted their proposed settlement agreement and related papers. (Settlement Agmt., ECF No. 31.) Having reviewed the proposed settlement, the Court finds that it is fair and reasonable, given both the nature and scope of Plaintiff's individual claims as well as the risks and expenses involved in additional litigation. See Wolinsky v. Scholastic, Inc., 900 F.Supp.2d 332, 335-36 (S.D.N.Y. 2012).
In addition, Plaintiff seeks approval of $12,666.67 in attorney's fees and costs, which is one-third of the total settlement amount. (See ECF No. 31 at 2; see also ECF No. 31-2 (showing lodestar of $ 6, 842.00).) Courts in this Circuit typically approve attorneys' fees in the amount of one-third of the total recovery. See, e.g., Ramos v. DNC Food Serv. Corp., No. 19-CV-02967 (VSB), 2022 WL 576300, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 25, 2022) (citing cases). “Additionally, courts regularly award lodestar multipliers from two to six times lodestar.” Id. (internal alterations and quotations omitted). In line with that precedent, the Court finds that the requested attorney's fees are fair and reasonable. In reaching this conclusion, the Court makes no findings with respect to the reasonableness of counsel's hourly rates.
For these reasons, the Court approves the settlement. This action is dismissed with prejudice and without costs except as may be stated in the settlement agreement. The Court will retain jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement. The Clerk of Court is respectfully requested to close this case.
SO ORDERED.