Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 19, 2020

Hinojosa v. Black Rose Hospitality Group LLC

Judge
Paul Gardephe
Docket
1:19-cv-09301
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureContract
In one sentence

In Hinojosa v. Black Rose Hospitality Group LLC, Judge Cave ordered the parties to submit their settlement for court approval and postponed the initial conference.

Who this affects

The parties to the case were required to submit their settlement agreement and related documents jointly by July 20, 2020. The scheduled initial conference was postponed without a new date.

What happened

In Hinojosa v. Black Rose Hospitality Group LLC, the parties told the court that they had reached a settlement on all issues during mediation.

The court directed the parties to submit their settlement agreement and related documents together for review. The submission was due by July 20, 2020.

Judge Sarah L. Cave adjourned the initial conference without setting a new date and directed that the settlement be reviewed by Judge Paul G. Gardephe under the required settlement-approval process.

The detailed version

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

Case
Hinojosa v. Black Rose Hospitality Group LLC · No. 1:19-cv-09301
Judge
Paul Gardephe
Date
June 19, 2020

Background

The parties reached a settlement covering all issues during mediation. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or the settlement's terms.

Order

Judge Sarah L. Cave directed the parties to jointly submit their settlement agreement and relevant documents for court approval under Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc. The documents were due by Monday, July 20, 2020, for review by the Honorable Paul G. Gardephe.

The court adjourned the initial conference scheduled for July 7, 2020, without setting a new date.

Disposition

The court ordered a joint settlement submission for approval and adjourned the initial conference. The order did not decide the underlying 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.