Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 26, 2025

Santos v. Rogans Realty Corp

Judge
Gabriel Gorenstein
Docket
1:23-cv-03726
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
FlsaCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Santos v. Rogans Realty Corp, Judge Gorenstein approved a fair settlement under the Fair Labor Standards Act and dismissed the case with prejudice.

Who this affects

The parties to the Fair Labor Standards Act case, including Pedro Santos, Rogans Realty Corp., and the other defendants, are affected by the approved settlement and dismissal with prejudice.

What happened

Santos v. Rogans Realty Corp involved claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The parties agreed that Magistrate Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein would decide the matter and submitted a proposed settlement.

The court reviewed the settlement for fairness and reasonableness and approved it. The opinion does not describe the settlement’s specific terms.

The court dismissed the action with prejudice and without costs except as stated in the settlement agreement, retained jurisdiction to enforce the settlement, found pending motions moot, and directed the Clerk to close the case. Judge Gorenstein issued the order.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Santos v. Rogans Realty Corp · No. 1:23-cv-03726
Judge
Gabriel Gorenstein
Date
Feb. 26, 2025

Background

Pedro Santos brought claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act against Rogans Realty Corp. and other defendants. On January 23, 2025, the parties consented to have the matter decided by United States Magistrate Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).

Settlement review

The parties submitted a proposed settlement agreement in a February 25, 2025 filing. The court reviewed the proposed agreement under Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc., which requires review of certain Fair Labor Standards Act settlements. The court found the settlement fair and reasonable and approved it. The opinion does not state the agreement’s specific terms.

Ruling

The court dismissed the action with prejudice and without costs, except as provided in the settlement agreement. It retained jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement. The court found any pending motions moot and directed the Clerk to close the case. Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein signed the order.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.