Skip to main content

FULGENCIO TALAVERA, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated v. 987 SUPERMARKET INC. d/b/a LOS VECINOS MEAT MARKET & SUPERMARKET, RAFAEL A. GUZMAN, and ROMAN RODRIGUEZ

S.D.N.Y.September 17, 2025No. 1:24-cv-03089
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
motion to dismiss

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Wage Theft

Outcome

The petitioner was awarded attorney's fees and costs totaling $29,861.32.

What This Ruling Means

**Important Note: Case Information Error** Based on the provided excerpt, this case appears to involve vaccine injury compensation rather than employment law, which conflicts with the wage theft classification listed. The excerpt indicates this was decided by the Court of Federal Claims under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, not an employment dispute about wages. **What the Information Suggests:** The case name indicates Fulgencio Talavera brought a claim against Los Vecinos Meat Market & Supermarket and its owners. It was classified as involving wage theft claims, suggesting workers may have sued their employer for unpaid wages or overtime violations. **The Outcome:** The case status is listed as "unresolvable" with no damages reported, but the excerpt discusses attorney's fees in a vaccine injury case, making it impossible to determine what actually happened in this employment dispute. **What This Would Mean for Workers:** Without accurate case details, it's impossible to draw meaningful conclusions for workers. If this were indeed a wage theft case, it would typically involve issues like unpaid minimum wages, overtime violations, or other compensation disputes that affect worker rights. *Note: The conflicting information makes it impossible to provide a reliable summary of this employment case.*

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

Browse more:Wage Theft cases

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.