Filho v. OTG Management, LLC

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided January 9, 2024·No. 1:19-cv-08287·Unknown

Opinion

ELECTRONICALLY F| DOC #: DATE FILED: 1/9/2024 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT —————— FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK DAFINIS FILHO, RAQUEL ERNEST and CHANTEL LYNCH on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, Case No. 19-CV-8287 (SN) -against- OTG Management, LLC, Defendant. ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS AND COLLECTIVE ACTION SETTLEMENT AND PLAINTIFFS’ UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF SERVICE AWARDS AND CLASS COUNSEL’S FEES AND COSTS Upon review and consideration of Plaintiffs’ Unopposed Motion for Final Approval of Class and Collective Action Settlement and Plaintiffs’ Unopposed Motion for Approval of Service Awards and Class Counsel’s Fees and Costs, including the memoranda, declarations, exhibits, and other papers attached thereto (“Motions for Final Approval”), the Court grants final approval of the settlement memorialized in the Settlement Agreement and “so orders” all of its terms incorporated herein. Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED as follows: 1. Jurisdiction. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of the litigation and over all parties to this litigation, including all Participating Class Members, as defined below. 2. Settlement. Plaintiffs Dafinis Filho, Raquel Ernest, and Chantel Lynch (“Plaintiffs” or “Named Plaintiffs”), on behalf of themselves and all Participating Class Members, and Defendant OTG Management, LLC (“Defendant” or “OTG”) (collectively, the “Parties”’), have negotiated a settlement of this action (the “Action’”) to avoid the uncertainties and burden of

protracted litigation, and to resolve any and all claims being released by the Settlement Agreement. 3. Review. The Court has carefully reviewed the Settlement Agreement, as well as the files, records, and proceedings to date in this matter and has heard argument by the parties at the Fairness Hearing. The terms and conditions in the Settlement Agreement are hereby

incorporated as though fully set forth in this Order, and, unless otherwise indicated, capitalized terms in this Order shall have the meanings attributed to them in the Settlement Agreement. 4. Final Approval. The Settlement Agreement entered into by and among the Parties is procedurally and substantively fair, reasonable, and adequate, and is not the product of collusion. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(e); City of Detroit v. Grinnell Corp., 495 F.2d 448, 462-63 (2d Cir. 1974). The relief is significant and meaningful, especially when weighed against the risks of ongoing litigation. Among other factors, the Court has considered the strengths and weaknesses of Plaintiffs’ case versus the benefits of the Settlement; the monetary recovery; the method of distribution and the treatment of Class Members; the likely complexity, length, and expense of further litigation; the lack of opposition to the Settlement among the Participating Class Members;

the opinion of competent counsel; the arm’s-length negotiations entered into with the assistance of a mediator; the amount of discovery undertaken; and the other terms of the settlement. 5. The Class consists of: (a) Opt-Out Class Members includes Federal 216(b) Claimants, Rule 23 New York Class Members, and Rule 23 New Jersey Class Members. (i) Federal 216(b) Claimants includes all current and former Tipped Workers employed by a Defendant Entity at LaGuardia Airport, John F. Kennedy Airport, and/or Newark Liberty Airport any time between September 6, 2016 to February 1, 2023, and who filed a Consent to Join the FLSA collective. (ii) Rule 23 New York Class Members are all current and former Tipped Workers employed by a Defendant Entity at LaGuardia Airport and/or John F. Kennedy Airport any time between September 6, 2013 to February 1, 2023, and who meet any one of the following criteria: (a) did not sign an arbitration agreement with Defendant; (b) signed a retainer agreement with Plaintiffs’ Counsel to bring their claims in arbitration; or (c) are Federal 216(b) Claimants. (iii) Rule 23 New Jersey Class Members are all current and former tipped workers employed by a Defendant Entity at Newark Liberty Airport any time between September 6, 2013 to February 1, 2023, and who meet any one of the following criteria: (a) did not sign an arbitration agreement with Defendant; (b) signed a Retainer agreement with Plaintiffs’ Counsel to bring their claims in arbitration; or (c) are Federal 216(b) Claimants. (iv) Opt-In Class Members includes all current and former Tipped Workers employed by a Defendant Entity at LaGuardia Airport, John F. Kennedy Airport, and/or Newark Liberty Airport any time between September 6, 2013 to February 1, 2023, and (a) who did not file a Consent to Join the FLSA collective; or (b) who signed an arbitration agreement with OTG and have not signed a retainer agreement with Plaintiffs’ Counsel to bring their claims in arbitration. Settlement Agreement § 1.3. 6. Final Certification of Settlement Class. The Court makes the following determinations as to certification of the Class for settlement purposes only: (a) The Court finally certifies the Class under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a), (b)(2) and (b)(3). (b) The Class is so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable; (c) There are questions of law or fact common to the members of the Class; (d) The claims of Plaintiffs are typical of the claims of the other members of the Class; (e) Plaintiffs are capable of fairly and adequately protecting the interests of the members of the Class, in connection with the Settlement Agreement; (f) Common questions of law and fact predominate over questions affecting only individual members of the Class; (g) The Class is ascertainable; (h) Resolution of the claims in this Action by way of settlement is superior to other available methods for the fair and efficient resolution of the claims of the Class. 7. Confirmation of Class Representatives. Plaintiffs Filho, Ernest, and Lynch are confirmed as representative of the Class for the sole purpose of seeking a settlement of the Action.

8. Confirmation of Class Counsel. Outten & Golden LLP (“O&G) is confirmed as Class Counsel for the sole purpose of seeking a settlement of the Action. 9. Class Notice. The Court finds that the notice effectuated was the best practicable notice under the circumstances, and was accomplished in all material respects, as set forth in Plaintiffs’ papers. The distribution of the notice fully met the requirements of Rule 23 and satisfied the requirements of constitutional due process and any other applicable law. 10. Releases.

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

Filho v. OTG Management, LLC, (S.D.N.Y. 2024).

Filho v. OTG Management, LLC (Filho v. OTG Management, LLC) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related