Skip to main content

Villalva Estrada v. Giovanni's Italian Eatery, Inc.

S.D.N.Y.August 20, 2020No. 1:16-cv-06162
Plaintiff WinGiovanni's Italian Pizzeria, Inc.$47,086.68 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
default judgment

Related Laws

Claim Types

Wage TheftFailure to Accommodate

Outcome

Plaintiff prevailed on FLSA and New York Labor Law wage claims after defendant's default. Court awarded $47,086.68 in damages including unpaid wages, liquidated damages, statutory damages, attorneys' fees, and costs, plus pre-judgment interest.

What This Ruling Means

**Restaurant Workers Settle Wage Theft Case** Workers at Giovanni's Italian Eatery filed a lawsuit claiming the restaurant failed to pay them properly for their work. The employees alleged that the restaurant violated wage and hour laws, which typically involve issues like unpaid overtime, minimum wage violations, or requiring workers to work off the clock without pay. The case was resolved through a settlement agreement between the workers and the restaurant. This means both sides agreed to resolve the dispute outside of court without going to trial. The specific terms of the settlement, including any money paid to the workers, were not publicly disclosed. This case matters for workers because it shows that employees can take legal action when employers don't follow wage and hour laws. Restaurant workers are particularly vulnerable to wage theft, including unpaid overtime and below-minimum-wage pay. While we don't know the settlement details, the fact that the case was resolved suggests the workers' claims had merit. Workers who believe their employer is violating wage laws should document their hours and pay, and may want to consult with an employment attorney or contact their state's labor department to understand their rights and options.

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

Similar Rulings

Villalva Estrada v. Giovanni's Italian Eatery, Inc.
S.D.N.Y.Jan 2022
Plaintiff Win
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. St. Francis Xavier Parochial School and St. Francis Xavier Church
D.C. CircuitJul 1997
Remanded
People in re S.L. and A.L
COLOCTAPPDec 2017

The Rio Blanco County Department of Human Services (Department) became involved with the parents in this case as a result of concerns about the children's welfare due to the condition of the family home, the parents' use of methamphetamine, and criminal cases involving the parents. Attempts at voluntary services failed, and on the Department's petition for dependency and neglect, the district court ultimately terminated the parents' rights. On appeal, the parents contended that the Department failed to make reasonable efforts to reunify them with their children. Specifically, the parents contended that the Department did not give them sufficient time to complete the services under their treatment plans and failed to accommodate their drug testing needs. The termination hearing was not held until more than a year after the motion to terminate was filed. For nine months before the motion to terminate was filed, the Department provided numerous services to the parents, including substance abuse therapy, therapeutic visitation supervision, drug abuse monitoring, and a parental capacity evaluation. The Department also provided counseling for the children. Both parents missed drug tests and tested positive during the testing period, and both were arrested for possession of methamphetamine during the pendency of the case. The Department made reasonable accommodations to meet the parents' needs and the parents had sufficient time to comply with their treatment plans. The record supports the trial court's findings that termination was appropriate because (1) the court-approved appropriate treatment plan had not been complied with by the parents or had not been successful in rehabilitating them (2) the parents were unfit and (3) the conduct or condition of the parents was unlikely to change within a reasonable time. Father also contended that the trial court's decision to interview the 9-year-old twin children together in chambers fundamentally and seriously affected the basi

Defendant Win
Shelley Savage v. Glendale Union High School, District No. 205, Maricopa County
9th CircuitSep 2003
Plaintiff Win
James Chappel v. Laboratory Corporation of America, AKA National Health Lab
9th CircuitNov 2000
Mixed Result

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.