Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 30, 2020

Merino Leon v. Univ 45 Fruit & Vegetable Corp.

Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Docket
1:19-cv-08266
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureClass Action
In one sentence

In Merino Leon v. Univ 45 Fruit & Vegetable Corp., Judge Abrams discontinued the case after settlement, allowing restoration within 30 days.

Who this affects

The three named plaintiffs, the listed defendants, and the other people the plaintiffs sought to represent were affected by the case’s discontinuance and closure. The order also set a 30-day period for seeking restoration or asking the court to retain jurisdiction to enforce a settlement.

What happened

Merino Leon v. Univ 45 Fruit & Vegetable Corp. involved Brigido Merino Leon, Maximo Martinez Ramirez, and Ricardo Ramirez Hernandez, who sued the listed defendants individually and on behalf of others similarly situated. The court was informed that the case had been settled in principle.

The court did not discuss the claims, the settlement’s terms, or the merits of the dispute. It ordered that the case be discontinued without costs to any party.

Judge Ronnie Abrams also ordered that the case could be restored to the court’s docket if an application was made within 30 days. The Clerk was directed to close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Merino Leon v. Univ 45 Fruit & Vegetable Corp. · No. 1:19-cv-08266
Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Date
Jan. 30, 2020

Background

Brigido Merino Leon, Maximo Martinez Ramirez, and Ricardo Ramirez Hernandez brought this action individually and on behalf of others similarly situated against Univ 45 Fruit & Vegetable, doing business as Epicurean Market; 45 University Place Corp., doing business as Epicurean Market; James Cho; and Sook J. Min. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or the parties’ settlement terms.

Court’s Action

The court was informed that the case had been settled in principle. It ordered that the action be discontinued without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring the action to the court’s docket if an application to restore it was made within 30 days. The court stated that an application filed after that period could be denied solely because it was late.

Settlement Enforcement and Disposition

The court stated that, if the parties wanted it to retain jurisdiction to enforce a settlement agreement, the agreement’s terms had to be placed on the public record and approved by the court within the same 30-day period. Judge Ronnie Abrams directed the Clerk of Court to close the case. The opinion does not resolve the merits of the claims.

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.