District Court, E.D. New York, 2025

Contreras v. Castro

Contreras v. Castro
District Court, E.D. New York · Decided April 3, 2025
Contreras v. Castro

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK --------------------------------------------------------------- X : ESTHER CONTRERAS, : Plaintiff, : ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION – against – : : 23-CV-9083 (AMD) (LB) JUAN CARLOS CASTRO and MATECAÑA : BAKERY INC., : Defendants. : --------------------------------------------------------------- X ANN M. DONNELLY, United States District Judge: On December 11, 2023, the plaintiff brought this action against the defendants, her former employers, alleging violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 201 et. seq.; the New York Labor Law (“NYLL”), Art. 6 §§ 190-99 and Art. 19 §§ 650-65 et. seq.; the New York State Human Rights Law (“NYSHRL”), N.Y. Exec.

Law §§ 296 et. seq.; the New York City Human Rights Law (“NYCHRL”), N.Y.C. Admin. Code §§ 8-107 et. seq.; the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (“TVPA”), 22 U.S.C. §§ 7101 et. seq.; and New York Social Services Law (“NYSSL”), N.Y. Soc. Serv. Law § 483-bb(c).

On October 10, 2024, the Court adopted Magistrate Judge Lois Bloom’s recommendation that the Court grant in part and deny in part the plaintiff’s motion for default judgment. (ECF No. 16.) The Court referred the case to Judge Bloom to conduct an inquest and prepare a Report and Recommendation on the amount of damages to award the plaintiff. (Id.) On March 7, 2025, Judge Bloom issued a comprehensive Report and Recommendation, recommending that the Court award the plaintiff $214,008.61 in damages, plus pre- and post-judgment interest. (ECF No. 26 at 22.) No objections have been filed to the Report and Recommendation, and the time for doing so has passed.

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)(1). To accept those portions of the report and recommendation 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. Globex Fund L.P., 823 F. Supp. 2d 161, 163 (E.D.N.Y. 2011) (quotation marks omitted).

I have carefully reviewed Judge Bloom’s well-reasoned and thoughtful Report and Recommendation and find no error. Accordingly, I adopt the Report and Recommendation in its entirety and order that the plaintiff is awarded $214,008.61 in damages, plus pre- and post- judgment interest.

SO ORDERED. s/Ann M. Donnelly ___________________________ ANN M. DONNELLY United States District Judge Dated: Brooklyn, New York April 2, 2025

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.