Arriaga v. Nipa Thai Restaurant 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 court approved a settlement agreement in this Fair Labor Standards Act case for $42,500, with $14,450.19 allocated to attorneys' fees and costs, resulting in $28,049.81 distributed to plaintiffs.
What This Ruling Means
Arriaga v. Nipa Thai Restaurant Corp.
What Happened
Workers at Nipa Thai Restaurant Corp. sued their employer for wage theft—failing to pay them properly for work performed. The case involved violations of federal wage and hour laws designed to protect workers' pay.
What the Court Decided
The court approved a settlement agreement requiring the restaurant to pay $42,500. After attorneys' fees and legal costs ($14,450.19) were deducted, the remaining $28,049.81 was distributed to the affected workers.
Why This Matters for Workers
This case shows that workers can successfully challenge employers who don't pay them fairly. Even when cases are settled rather than fully tried in court, workers can recover money they were owed. The settlement demonstrates that federal wage laws have real consequences for employers who violate them. Workers facing similar situations—unpaid overtime, improper deductions, or other pay problems—have legal options available to recover what they're entitled to earn.
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.