Ametepe v. Peak Time Parking, Corp.

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided November 11, 2021·No. 1:18-cv-05384·Unknown

Opinion

DOCUMENT ELECTRONICALLY FILED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DOC #: SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK DATE FILED: 1/11/2021

JAMES AMETEPE, on behalf of himself, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Docket No: No. 18-CV-05384 (SDA) Plaintiffs, -against-

PEAK TIME PARKING, CORP., and FIH ENTERPRISE INC., and SAM DAR ENTERPRISES INC., and AD PARKING INC. and ZAFAR MAJEED, individually, and FAYYAZ KHAN, individually, and NAVEED ANJUM, individually, and MUSTAFA ALI KHANDWALLA, individually, Defendants.

STIPULATED ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE Upon the joint application of the Plaintiffs and Defendants in the above- captioned action, by their respective counsel, for entry of an Order of Dismissal with Prejudice, which incorporates within it all terms from the parties’ negotiated Settlement Agreement and Release, attached hereto as Exhibit A, and the parties having consented to the entry of this Order; and sufficient cause appearing for the same; after due deliberation; it is

HEREBY ORDERED AS FOLLOWS: 1. The parties’ duly executed Settlement Agreement and Release, attached hereto as Exhibit A, and all terms contained within it, are hereby incorporated into the instant order. 2. This action, including all claims asserted by the Plaintiffs herein, is hereby dismissed with prejudice as against all of the Defendants, pursuant to Rule 41(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; 3. All parties are directed to proceed in accordance with the Settlement Agreement and Release, and all parties are responsible for their own attorneys’ fees and costs except as provided therein; 4, The Court shall retain jurisdiction over this matter to enforce the terms of the parties’ Settlement Agreement and Release, and to enter judgment against Defendants in accordance therewith, should that become necessary. Dated: November 10, 2021

BORRELLI & ASSOCIATES, P.L.L.C. BLAU LEONARD LAW GROUP, LLC 4 py EC be by: Loe, Penal fe — Andrew C. Weiss , Esq. Steven Bennett Blau, Esq. 910 Franklin Avenue, Suite 200 23 Green Street, Suite 105 Garden City, New York 11530 Huntington, New York 11743 Attorneys tor Plaintitts Attorneys tor Defendants Having reviewed the proposed settlement, the Court finds that it is fair and reasonable. See Che v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc., 796 F.3d 199 (2d Cir. 2015). . SO ORDERED this _ 1? day of ovember 2021

The Honorable Stewart D. Aaron, U.S.M.J.

EXHIBIT “A” UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ____________________________________________________ JAMES AMETEPE, on behalf of himself, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Docket No: 18CV5384 (PAE)(SDA) Plaintiffs, -against- PEAK TIME PARKING, CORP., and FIH ENTERPRISE INC., and SAM DAR ENTERPRISES INC., and AD PARKING INC. and ZAFAR MAJEED, individually, and FAYYAZ KHAN, individually, and NAVEED ANJUM, individually, and MUSTAFA ALI KHANDWALLA, individually, Defendants. ___________________________________________________ SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND RELEASE This Settlement Agreement and Release (the “Settlement Agreement”) is made and entered into by and between JAMES AMETEPE, PEDRO SABALA, and EMMANUAL BOADI (“Plaintiffs”) and SAM DAR ENTERPRISES INC., ZAFAR MAJEED and NAVEED ANJUM (“Defendants”) (“Plaintiffs” and “Defendants” are jointly referred to in this Settlement Agreement as the “Settling Parties”), as of November_1_0_, 2021. RECITALS WHEREAS, on or about February 18, 2019, Plaintiffs JAMES AMETEPE filed an action against Defendants relating to his employment (the “Action”). On or about June 18, 2021, Plaintiff PEDRO SABALA filed a Consent to Join Class. On or about September 12, 2018, Plaintiff EMMANUAL BOADI filed a Consent to Join Class. The aforementioned Action is currently pending in the United States District Court,

Southern District of New York, Case No.: 18-cv-5384 (PAE)(SDA); WHEREAS, no court has considered or determined the merits of Plaintiffs’ claims; WHEREAS, Defendants admit no wrongdoing, nor any liability with respect to, Plaintiffs’ allegations; WHEREAS, the Settling Parties participated in multiple settlement conferences with U.S. Magistrate Judge, Stuart D. Aaron, at which time the Settling

Parties expressed a desire to settle this matter to avoid the uncertainty, expense and burden of proceeding with the Action; WHEREAS, no party to the Action is an infant or incompetent; and WHEREAS, the Settling Parties agree, through the execution of this Settlement Agreement, which includes the terms agreed upon by the Settling Parties at the time of the settlement conferences, to dispose of and resolve fully and

completely any and all disputes, causes of action, claims, issues and/or differences between the Settling Parties. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing, and in consideration of the covenants, warranties, and promises set forth below, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the Settling Parties agree as follows: AGREEMENTS 1. Consideration. The Settling Parties are entering into this Settlement Agreement in exchange for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged. Plaintiffs agree that Plaintiffs will not seek any further consideration from or assert any additional or further claims against Defendants, including any monetary payment, beyond that which is set forth in Paragraph 2 of this Settlement Agreement, for the claims alleged, or could have been alleged, in the Action. 2. Settlement Compensation. Defendants vigorously deny Plaintiffs’ claims but acknowledge the expense and burden of proceeding with the Action. Plaintiffs also acknowledge the uncertainty, expense, time, and burden associated with proceeding with the Action and establishing entitlement to a recovery. In the interest of avoiding such uncertainty, expense and burden, the Settling Parties have agreed to resolve this matter pursuant to terms and conditions of this Settlement Agreement, which include, but are not limited to, Defendants agreeing to pay Plaintiffs the total sum of ONE HUNDRED FIFTY-FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS AND NO CENTS ($155,000.00) (the “Settlement Payment’). The Settling Parties agree that the Settlement Payment is inclusive of costs and attorneys’ fees and is made in full settlement of any and all claims the Plaintiffs have asserted, or could have asserted, against the named Defendants in the Action. The Settlement Payment will be made in one (1) down payment and thirteen (13) consecutive monthly installment payments as follows:

a. Down Payment. Defendants shall deliver to Plaintiffs’ Counsel, Borrelli & Associates, PLLC, 910 Franklin Avenue, Suite 200, Garden City, New York 11530, seven (7) checks. The first check shall be made payable to Plaintiff AMETEPE in the amount of ($2,542.91), without deductions and/or withholdings, and shall be treated for tax purposes as 1099 MISC income. The second check shall be made payable to Plaintiff AMETEPE for salary (W-2 income) in the gross amount of ($2,542.91), before deductions and/or withholdings. The third check shall be made payable to Plaintiff BOADI in the amount of ($1,130.18), without deductions and/or withholdings, and shall be treated for tax purposes as 1099 MISC income. The fourth check shall be made payable to Plaintiff BOADI for salary (W-2 income) in the gross amount of ($1,130.19) before deductions and/or withholdings. The fifth check shall be made payable to Plaintiff SABALA in the amount of ($1,977.82), without deductions and/or withholdings, and shall be treated for tax purposes as 1099 MISC income. The sixth check shall be made payment to Plaintiff SABALA for salary (W-2 income) in the gross amount of ($1,977.82), before deductions and/or withholdings.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Ametepe v. Peak Time Parking, Corp., (S.D.N.Y. 2021).

Ametepe v. Peak Time Parking, Corp. (Ametepe v. Peak Time Parking, Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc.
796 F.3d 199 (Second Circuit, 2015)