Tenezaca v. 808 Lex Restaurant, LLC
- Clarke
- 1:23-cv-08545
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Tenezaca v. 808 Lex Restaurant, Judge Clarke scheduled a remote conference to discuss the parties’ proposed settlement.
Counsel for all parties were required to attend the remote conference. The parties’ proposed settlement was subject to discussion and court review, and members of the public could listen by telephone.
What happened
In Tenezaca v. 808 Lex Restaurant, the plaintiffs and defendants had proposed a settlement agreement. The order does not describe the underlying claims or the agreement’s terms.
The court ordered counsel for all parties to attend a remote conference on April 2, 2025, to discuss the settlement and whether its terms comply with the standards discussed in Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House. The court also provided a public listen-only telephone line.
Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke stated that the court intended to rule on the parties’ motion at the conference. This order did not itself approve or reject the settlement.
The detailed version
- Tenezaca v. 808 Lex Restaurant, LLC · No. 1:23-cv-08545
- Clarke
- Mar. 3, 2025
Order
The court ordered counsel for all parties to appear remotely on April 2, 2025, for a conference about their proposed settlement agreement. The order directed the parties to be prepared to discuss all of the agreement’s terms and whether those terms are consistent with the settlement-review standards identified in Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, a Second Circuit decision cited by the court.
The court provided access information for counsel and a public listen-only telephone line. It stated that it intended to rule on the parties’ motion at the conference.
What the Order Did Not Decide
The opinion does not state the underlying claims, describe the settlement’s terms, or say that the settlement was approved or rejected. It is a scheduling and settlement-review order rather than a decision on the merits of the parties’ dispute.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.