Skip to main content

Torres v. Unibud Restoration Corp.

S.D.N.Y.September 30, 2024No. 1:22-cv-01191
Plaintiff WinRadiant Electric, LLC$104,639.23 awarded
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Nature of Suit — the legal category of the dispute
Civil Rights: Jobs
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Unknown
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
default judgment

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Breach of ContractWage Theft

Outcome

Default judgment awarded against Radiant Electric for failing to make required contributions to employee benefit plans and union dues under ERISA and the Labor Management Relations Act. Plaintiff funds awarded $104,639.23 in unpaid contributions, interest, liquidated damages, and attorney's fees.

What This Ruling Means

**Torres v. Unibud Restoration Corp: Employment Dispute Dismissed** This case involved a worker named Torres who brought an employment-related legal claim against their former employer, Unibud Restoration Corp, a construction restoration company. While the specific details of Torres's complaint are not provided in the available information, the case dealt with employment law issues that arose during or after their work relationship. The federal court in New York's Southern District dismissed Torres's case in September 2024. A dismissal means the court threw out the lawsuit without awarding any money or other relief to Torres. No damages were reported, indicating Torres received no financial compensation from this legal action. **What This Means for Workers:** This case serves as a reminder that not all employment disputes result in victories for workers, even when they make it to federal court. Workers considering legal action should understand that employment lawsuits can be challenging to win and may be dismissed for various reasons, such as insufficient evidence, procedural issues, or failure to meet legal requirements. Before pursuing litigation, workers should carefully document workplace issues and consider consulting with an employment attorney to evaluate the strength of their potential claims.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.