Skip to main content

De Dios De Los Santos v. Shree Laxmi Restaurant, Inc.

S.D.N.Y.March 29, 2023No. 1:22-cv-10774
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

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
Settlement in SDNY

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Outcome

Settlement reached in Fair Labor Standards Act case against restaurant employer regarding wage and hour violations.

What This Ruling Means

**Restaurant Worker Wins Wage Violation Settlement** A worker sued Shree Laxmi Restaurant, Inc. for violating federal wage and hour laws. The employee, De Dios De Los Santos, claimed the restaurant failed to follow the Fair Labor Standards Act, which sets rules for minimum wage and overtime pay. The lawsuit was filed in federal court in New York in March 2023. The case was resolved through a settlement agreement between the worker and the restaurant. While the specific settlement amount was not disclosed publicly, the restaurant agreed to resolve the wage and hour violation claims without going to trial. This case shows that restaurant workers have legal protections when employers don't follow wage laws. The Fair Labor Standards Act requires employers to pay at least minimum wage and overtime pay (time-and-a-half) for hours worked over 40 in a week. Workers in restaurants and other industries can take legal action when these rules are broken. Even though this case settled privately, it demonstrates that employees have options when they believe their employer has violated wage laws, and that courts take these violations seriously.

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

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.