Skip to main content

Su v. Sarene Services, Inc. et.al.

E.D.N.Y.April 16, 2025No. 2:20-cv-03273
Plaintiff WinBaker Hughes Oilfield Operations, LLC$184,274.54 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
710 Labor: Fair Standards
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Unknown
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
summary judgment

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Breach of Contract

Outcome

Norfolk Southern prevailed in its contract dispute against Baker Hughes over freight charges and was awarded attorney's fees and costs. The court denied Baker Hughes's motion for reconsideration and granted Norfolk's motion for attorney's fees in the amount of $175,980.00 plus $8,294.54 in costs.

What This Ruling Means

**Court Ruling Summary: Su v. Sarene Services** **What Happened:** This case involved a contract dispute between Su (the employee/plaintiff) and Sarene Services, Inc. The details show this was a breach of contract claim where the employee successfully argued that their employer violated the terms of their employment agreement. **What the Court Decided:** The court ruled in favor of Su, the employee, and awarded damages totaling $184,274.54. This means the court found that Sarene Services did indeed breach the employment contract and ordered the company to pay significant compensation to make up for the harm caused. **Why This Matters for Workers:** This ruling demonstrates that employees can successfully challenge employers in court when employment contracts are violated. The substantial damage award shows that courts will hold companies accountable for breaking their agreements with workers. For employees, this case highlights the importance of having clear employment contracts and understanding your rights when those agreements aren't honored. It also shows that pursuing legal action for contract violations can result in meaningful financial compensation, though each case depends on its specific facts and circumstances.

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.