Charvac v. M&T Project Managers of New York, Inc.
Filing
38
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: For the reasons stated above, the Court adopts the R&R, with minor adjustments to the calculations for the amount of the judgment. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment in favor of the plaintiffs: $45,686.93 for M. Charvac, $1,200 for E. Charvac, $24,714.61 for J.V. Patzan, and $31,305.12 for J.G. Patzan, plus $6,731.17 in attorneys' fees and costs, and post-judgment interest as prescribed by 28 U.S.C. § 1961. The Clerk is further directed to terminate all motions and close the case. Ordered by Chief Judge Carol Bagley Amon on 9/17/2015. (fwd for judgment) (Fernandez, Erica)
U(j..
i:~~:"U_v.
*k . SEP l 7 2015 ~
UNITED STA TES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
~Q§l~l-ttP.§f~
------------------------------------------------------)(
MARIO CHARYAC, ESTUARDO
CHARVAC, JOSE V. PATZAN, and JOSE
GEOVANIPATZAN,
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
12-CV-5637 (CBA) (RER)
Plaintiffs,
-againstM&T PROJECT MANAGERS OF NEW
YORK, INC.,
Defendant.
------------------------------------------------------)(
AMON, Chief United States District Judge:
Plaintiffs claim that their former employer, defendant M&T Project Managers of New
York ("M&T"), consistently failed to pay them overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor
Standards Act of 1938, 29 U.S.C. § 201 et. seq. ("FLSA"), and the New York Labor Law, N.Y.
Lab. Law § 650 et. seq. ("NYLL"). M&T has failed to appear in these proceedings, and the Clerk
of Court noted its default on July 1, 2014. (DE #30.) Plaintiffs moved for a default judgment on
September 8, 2014. (DE #33.) This Court referred the motion to Magistrate Judge Reyes, (DE
Dated Sept. 9, 2014 ), who issued a Report and Recommendation ("R&R") finding that a default
judgment should be entered against M&T. (DE #35.)
When deciding whether to adopt an R&R, a district court "may accept, reject, or modify,
in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(b)(l)(C). To accept those portions of the R&R to which no timely objection has been
made, "a district court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the
record." Jarvis v. N. Am. Globe:x Fund, L.P., 823 F. Supp. 2d 161, 163 (E.D.N.Y. 2011)
(internal quotation marks and citation omitted). When specific objections are made, however,
"[t]he district judge must determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge's disposition that
1
has been properly objected to." Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3).
Here, no party has raised an objection to the R&R. Accordingly, the Court reviews it for
clear error and, finding none, adopts it as the opinion of the Court, subject to the following
clarifications concerning the amounts M&T owes to the plaintiffs.
With respect to unpaid overtime wages, the Court accepts the magistrate judge's general
calculation methodology. The Court awards slightly different amounts from those recommended
because it credits all plaintiffs for their first and last days of employment with M&T, and
because it discounts partial weeks in which plaintiffs would not have exceeded 40 hours of labor
based on a pro-rated, daily average of hours worked. Accordingly, plaintiff Mario Charvac ("M.
Charvac") is entitled to $23,481.82; plaintiffEstuardo Charvac ("E. Charvac") is entitled to
$600; plaintiff Jose V. Patzan ("J.V. Patzan") is entitled to $12,845.45; and plaintiff Jose
Geovani Patzan ("J.G. Patzan") is entitled to $16,118.18. In total, M&T owes plaintiffs
$53,045.45 in unpaid overtime wages.
The Court also accepts the magistrate judge's recommendations concerning the method
for calculating liquidated damages, including his finding that plaintiffs' FLSA claims support
liquidated damages in amounts equal to unpaid overtime wages, and that older claims falling
under the NYLL entitle plaintiffs to liquidated damages worth one quarter of unpaid overtime
wages. Accordingly, the Court awards liquidated damages as follows: M. Charvac is entitled to
$13,909.09; E. Charvac is entitled to $600; J.V. Patzan is entitled to $8,672.73; and J.G. Patzan
is entitled to $12,252.28. In total, M&T owes plaintiffs $35,434.10 in liquidated damages.'
1
These values differ slightly from the numbers in the R&R. For two plaintiffs, that is at least in part because the
Court has awarded slightly different underlying amounts for unpaid overtime wages. Additionally, as a general
matter, the Court treats plaintiffs' claims for overtime as accruing at the end of each workweek; as a result, weeks
that end, but do not begin, within the statute of limitations for the plaintiffs' FLSA claims still generate overtime
warranting liquidated damages under the FLSA.
2
The Court accepts the magistrate judge's approach concerning the calculation of prejudgment interest. Accordingly, it awards pre-judgment interest as follows: M. Charvac is
entitled to $8,296.02; E. Charvac is entitled to no pre-judgment interest; J.V. Patzan is entitled to
$3,196.43; and J.G. Patzan is entitled to $2,934.66. As the magistrate judge noted, plaintiffs are
also entitled to post-judgment interest on the full amount of their recovery, to be calculated as
prescribed by 28 U.S.C. § 1961.
Finally, the Court accepts the magistrate judge's rates for awarding attorneys' fees as
well as his finding of the proper amount in costs. Accordingly, the Court awards plaintiffs $6,246
in attorneys' fees and an additional $485.17 in costs, for a total of $6,731.17.
CONCLUSION
For the reasons stated above, the Court adopts the R&R, with minor adjustments to the
calculations for the amount of the judgment. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment in
favor of the plaintiffs: $45,686.93 for M. Charvac, $1,200 for E. Charvac, $24,714.61 for J.V.
Patzan, and $31,305.12 for J.G. Patzan, plus $6, 731.17 in attorneys' fees and costs, and postjudgment interest as prescribed by 28 U.S.C. § 1961. The Clerk is further directed to terminate
all motions and close the case.
SO ORDERED.
1,
Dated: September
Brooklyn, Ne
2015
York
s/Carol Bagley Amon
3
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?