Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 24, 2020

Jun v. Central Park West Dental Studio, PLLC

Judge
Lorna Schofield
Docket
1:19-cv-11716
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureFee Petition
In one sentence

In Jun v. Central Park West Dental Studio, Judge Schofield approved the settlement, granted $1,500 in fees, and dismissed the action without prejudice to timely restoration.

Who this affects

Eunice Jun, her counsel, and the defendants were affected by the approved settlement, the $1,500 attorneys’ fee award, and the dismissal of the action.

What happened

In Jun v. Central Park West Dental Studio, PLLC, Eunice Jun asked the court to approve a proposed settlement. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims.

The court found the settlement fair and reasonable in light of the claims, the risks of further litigation, and the expenses involved. It approved $1,500 in attorneys’ fees for Jun’s counsel, with the rest of the settlement going to Jun.

Judge Lorna G. Schofield dismissed the action without costs and without prejudice to restoring it within 30 days. Pending motions were dismissed as moot, and all conferences and deadlines were canceled.

The detailed version

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

Case
Jun v. Central Park West Dental Studio, PLLC · No. 1:19-cv-11716
Judge
Lorna Schofield
Date
June 24, 2020

Background

On June 18, 2020, Plaintiff filed a letter motion asking the court to approve a proposed settlement. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or the settlement’s specific terms.

Settlement Approval

The court approved the settlement as fair and reasonable. In reaching that conclusion, it considered the nature and scope of Plaintiff’s claims, along with the risks and expenses of additional litigation.

Attorneys’ Fees and Distribution

The court granted Plaintiff’s counsel’s request for $1,500 in reasonable attorneys’ fees. The remainder of the settlement was ordered to be distributed to Plaintiff.

Disposition

The court ordered that the action be dismissed without costs and without prejudice to restoring it to the court’s calendar, provided that an application to restore was made within 30 days of the order. The court stated that an application filed after 30 days could be denied solely on that basis. Any pending motions were dismissed as moot, and all conferences and deadlines were canceled.

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.