Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled May 6, 2025

Angel Espinobarros v. El Encanto De Lola 2 LLC

Judge
Clarke
Docket
1:24-cv-01048
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Luis Angel Espinobarros v. El Encanto De Lola 2 LLC, Judge Clarke scheduled a settlement conference and planned to rule on the parties’ motion.

Who this affects

Counsel for all parties must attend the June 5, 2025 conference. The parties’ proposed settlement and pending motion will be discussed there, and the court intends to rule on the motion at that time.

What happened

Luis Angel Espinobarros and Rosa Jeronimo sued El Encanto De Lola 2 LLC and other defendants. The opinion does not describe the claims or the parties’ proposed settlement terms.

The court ordered counsel for all parties to attend a remote conference on June 5, 2025, to discuss the proposed settlement agreement and whether its terms comply with the standards described in Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc. The court also provided instructions for attending and for public listening.

Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke stated that the court intends to rule on the parties’ motion at the conference. This order did not itself grant or deny that motion.

The detailed version

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

Case
Angel Espinobarros v. El Encanto De Lola 2 LLC · No. 1:24-cv-01048
Judge
Clarke
Date
May 6, 2025

Order

The court ordered counsel for all parties to appear for a conference on June 5, 2025, at 3:30 p.m. The conference will address the terms of the parties’ proposed settlement agreement. It will be held remotely through Microsoft Teams, and the court provided login and public listen-only access information.

The court directed the parties to be prepared to discuss all terms of their agreement and whether those terms are consistent with Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc., a Second Circuit decision concerning court review of certain settlements. The opinion does not identify the claims, describe the settlement terms, or state the substance of the pending motion.

Disposition and effect

The court stated that it intends to rule on the parties’ motion at the conference. The order itself does not state that the motion was granted, denied, or otherwise decided. It schedules a settlement-review conference and gives counsel and the public instructions for attending.

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.