Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 16, 2020

Chan v. A Taste of Mao, Inc.

Judge
Barbara Moses
Docket
1:15-cv-09723
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
FlsaCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Chan v. A Taste of Mao, Judge Moses dismissed the Fair Labor Standards Act case with prejudice after the parties adhered to their approved settlement.

Who this affects

The five plaintiffs and the defendants in the Fair Labor Standards Act litigation; the action was terminated with prejudice.

What happened

In Chan v. A Taste of Mao, Inc., the parties asked the court to approve revised settlement agreements after identifying errors in the first agreement. The court rejected both proposed revisions and directed the parties either to submit another revision or follow the original approved agreement.

The parties told the court they would follow the original agreement. That agreement required settlement payments within 90 days and contemplated dismissal of the case with prejudice after the settlement was completed. The plaintiff never submitted the required dismissal stipulation.

Judge Barbara Moses dismissed the action with prejudice because more than 90 days had passed since the parties confirmed they would follow the original agreement. She directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the action.

The detailed version

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

Case
Chan v. A Taste of Mao, Inc. · No. 1:15-cv-09723
Judge
Barbara Moses
Date
June 16, 2020

Background

This Fair Labor Standards Act litigation involved five plaintiffs and the defendants named in the case caption. The parties submitted an original settlement agreement, which the court approved as fair and reasonable on February 19, 2019.

The parties later reported errors concerning the timing and source of settlement payments and asked to reopen the case to submit an amended agreement. The court granted that request. After reviewing the parties' proposed amended and revised amended agreements, the court denied approval of both and directed the parties either to submit another revised agreement or to follow the original agreement. The parties then advised the court that they would follow the original agreement.

Ruling

The original agreement contemplated payment of all settlement sums within 90 days of court approval and required the parties to submit papers necessary to dismiss the lawsuit with prejudice. The court had also directed the plaintiff to submit a dismissal stipulation within seven days after the final payment. The plaintiff never submitted that stipulation.

The court concluded that considerably more than 90 days had passed since the parties confirmed they would adhere to the original agreement. It therefore dismissed the action with prejudice, as contemplated by the agreement and the court's February 19, 2019 order. Judge Barbara Moses directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the action.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.