Ortega Juarez v. Mi Mexico Mini Market & Grocery Inc.
- Stewart Aaron
- 1:23-cv-06978
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
Ortega Juarez v. Mi Mexico, Judge Rochon vacated the default judgment and reopened the case.
The ruling affects Ruben Ortega Juarez, the other plaintiffs, Mi Mexico Mini Market & Grocery Inc., Cecilio Lezama, Rene Lezama, and Jael Lezama. The default judgment against the defendants was vacated, related orders were to be vacated, and the case was reopened.
What happened
In Ortega Juarez v. Mi Mexico Mini Market & Grocery Inc., the court considered the defendants’ request to set aside a default judgment entered against them on January 26, 2024. The plaintiffs did not oppose the request.
The court explained that federal rules allow relief from a default judgment for reasons including excusable neglect, misconduct, or another justified reason. It also noted that courts generally prefer resolving disputes on their merits.
Judge Jennifer L. Rochon ruled that relief was justified. She vacated the default judgment, directed the Clerk to vacate related orders, ended the pending motions, and reopened the case.
The detailed version
- Ortega Juarez v. Mi Mexico Mini Market & Grocery Inc. · No. 1:23-cv-06978
- Stewart Aaron
- Jan. 22, 2025
Background
Ruben Ortega Juarez brought the case individually and on behalf of others similarly situated against Mi Mexico Mini Market & Grocery Inc., doing business as Mi Mexico Meat Market, and Cecilio Lezama, Rene Lezama, and Jael Lezama. On January 26, 2024, the court entered a default judgment for the plaintiffs and against the defendants.
On December 31, 2024, the defendants moved under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60 to vacate, or set aside, the default judgment. The plaintiffs did not oppose the motion.
Court’s reasoning
The court stated that Rule 60 permits a court to set aside a final default judgment for reasons including mistake, inadvertence, surprise, excusable neglect, fraud, misrepresentation, misconduct by an opposing party, or another reason justifying relief. The court also relied on the Second Circuit’s general disfavor of default judgments and its preference for resolving disputes on their merits.
Ruling
The court found that relief from the default judgment was justified and vacated the default judgment. It directed the Clerk of Court to vacate the judgment and any corresponding orders, terminate the motions pending at Docket Entries 41 and 42, and reopen the case.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.