Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Nov. 25, 2019

Martinez v. Felipe's Pizza and Restaurant, Inc.

Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Docket
1:19-cv-06136
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
4
Civil ProcedureFlsa
In one sentence

In Martinez v. Felipe’s, Judge Abrams ordered the parties to discuss consenting to Magistrate Judge Aaron’s authority over all further proceedings after mediation failed.

Who this affects

Fortino Martinez, the putative similarly situated parties, Felipe’s Pizza and Restaurant, Inc. doing business as Frank’s Trattoria, Hortensia Pino, and Felipe Pino.

What happened

In Martinez v. Felipe’s Pizza and Restaurant, Inc., the parties told the court that mediation had not succeeded. The case was also being referred to Magistrate Judge Aaron for general pretrial matters.

The court ordered the parties to discuss whether they would voluntarily allow Judge Aaron to handle all remaining proceedings. If they agreed, they had two weeks to file a completed consent form; if any party declined, they had to file a joint letter saying so without identifying who declined. The court said there would be no adverse consequences for withholding consent.

Judge Ronnie Abrams did not decide the underlying claims. The order also reminded the parties that settlements of most claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act generally require court approval.

The detailed version

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

Case
Martinez v. Felipe's Pizza and Restaurant, Inc. · No. 1:19-cv-06136
Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Date
Nov. 25, 2019

Background

Fortino Martinez brought this case on behalf of himself and others similarly situated against Felipe’s Pizza and Restaurant, Inc., doing business as Frank’s Trattoria, Hortensia Pino, and Felipe Pino. The parties notified the court that mediation was unsuccessful. The court stated that the case would be separately referred to Magistrate Judge Aaron for general pretrial matters.

Order concerning magistrate-judge consent

To conserve resources, promote efficiency, and seek a faster resolution, the court ordered the parties to discuss whether they would consent under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) to having Magistrate Judge Aaron conduct all further proceedings. If all parties consented, they had to submit a fully completed consent form within two weeks of the order’s date. If the court approved the form, Judge Aaron would conduct all further proceedings instead of the district court judge, and any appeal would go directly to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.

If any party did not consent, the parties had to file a joint letter within two weeks stating that they did not consent, without identifying the party or parties who withheld consent. The court stated that withholding consent would not result in adverse consequences.

Other reminder

The court reminded the parties that settlements of claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act generally require court approval, citing a Second Circuit decision.

Disposition and significance

Judge Ronnie Abrams entered a case-management order concerning referral and consent to magistrate-judge authority. The order did not resolve the parties’ underlying claims or rule on the merits of the case.

The authoritative version

Read the full 4-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.