Ramos v. Koonsup Thai, Inc.
Case Details
- Nature of Suit — the legal category of the dispute
- Labor: Fair Standards
- Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
- Unknown
- Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
- consent decree
- State
- New York
- Circuit
- Second Circuit
Related Laws
No specific laws identified for this ruling.
Claim Types
Outcome
The court approved a settlement in this Fair Labor Standards Act collective action, finding it fair and reasonable. The plaintiff received $15,000 in settlement with $4,865.02 approved for attorney's fees and $404.95 in costs, and the case was dismissed with prejudice.
What This Ruling Means
Ramos v. Koonsup Thai, Inc. — Case Summary
What Happened
Ramos filed a lawsuit against Koonsup Thai, Inc., claiming the restaurant failed to pay workers the wages they earned. This type of case, called a collective action, allows multiple employees to join together if they experienced similar wage problems.
What the Court Decided
The court approved a settlement agreement between Ramos and the restaurant. Ramos received $15,000 in damages for unpaid wages. The court also approved an additional $4,865 to cover his attorney's fees and about $405 in case costs. The case was dismissed, meaning it will not be reopened.
Why This Matters for Workers
This case shows that workers can successfully challenge employers who don't pay them fairly. When employees band together in collective lawsuits, they can recover lost wages. The settlement also demonstrates that courts will help cover legal costs, making it more practical for workers to pursue these claims. Even small restaurants must follow federal wage laws, and workers have legal options if their employer fails to do so.
This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.
Similar Rulings
Browse Related
Facing something similar at work?
Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 3 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.