Mendoza v. LGRC Corp.
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
- consent decree
- State
- New York
- Circuit
- Second Circuit
Related Laws
No specific laws identified for this ruling.
Claim Types
Outcome
The parties settled Fernando Mendoza's Fair Labor Standards Act and state wage-and-hour claims. LGRC Corp. and Young Chul Song agreed to pay $25,500 in three installments, of which $16,656.66 goes to the plaintiff after attorney fees and costs. The court approved the settlement as fair and reasonable and dismissed the case with prejudice.
What This Ruling Means
Mendoza v. LGRC Corp. Settlement Summary
What Happened
Fernando Mendoza sued LGRC Corp. and its owner, Young Chul Song, claiming the company failed to pay him wages he was legally owed. The dispute involved violations of federal wage-and-hour laws that protect workers' pay rights.
What the Court Decided
Instead of going to trial, both sides agreed to settle the case. LGRC Corp. and Young Chul Song agreed to pay $25,500 total. After attorney fees and court costs were deducted, Mendoza received $16,656.66. A federal judge in New York approved this settlement as fair and reasonable, and the case was closed.
Why This Matters for Workers
This case reinforces that companies cannot simply withhold wages without consequences. Even when employers don't admit wrongdoing, they may still pay settlements to resolve wage disputes. Workers who believe they haven't been paid fairly have legal options to recover unpaid wages, and courts take these claims seriously. If you suspect wage theft, you may have grounds to pursue a claim.
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.