Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.OtherFiled Nov. 13, 2025

Juan Jose Chapman Veloz v. Chestnut Holdings of New York, Inc.

Judge
John Cronan
Docket
1:25-cv-03409
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureEmployment
In one sentence

In Chapman Veloz v. Chestnut Holdings, Judge Cronan ordered the parties to prepare to discuss whether Plaintiff has standing.

Who this affects

Juan Jose Chapman Veloz and the defendants are affected because the parties must be prepared to discuss Plaintiff's standing at the scheduled pre-motion teleconference.

What happened

In Chapman Veloz v. Chestnut Holdings of New York, Inc., the court addressed preparations for a pre-motion conference scheduled for November 18, 2025.

The parties were told to be prepared to discuss whether Juan Jose Chapman Veloz has constitutional standing to bring claims under New York Labor Law provisions concerning wage notices and wage statements.

Judge Cronan did not decide whether Plaintiff has standing or rule on the claims; he issued an order adding that issue to the conference discussion.

The detailed version

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

Case
Juan Jose Chapman Veloz v. Chestnut Holdings of New York, Inc. · No. 1:25-cv-03409
Judge
John Cronan
Date
Nov. 13, 2025

What the Order Did

The court directed the parties to be prepared to discuss an additional issue at a pre-motion teleconference scheduled for November 18, 2025, at 2:00 p.m.

Issue Identified

The issue is whether Plaintiff has Article III standing—the constitutional requirement that a person have a sufficient personal stake in a dispute—to bring claims under the New York Labor Law's wage-notice and wage-statement provisions, cited in the order as New York Labor Law § 195(1) and (3).

Disposition

The order did not decide whether Plaintiff has standing, resolve the cited claims, or grant or deny a motion. It directed the parties to be prepared to discuss the standing issue at the scheduled conference.

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.