Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 29, 2020

Zarate v. New Green Emporium Corp.

Judge
Vyskocil
Docket
1:17-cv-00670
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
FlsaCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Zarate v. New Green Emporium Corp., Judge Vyskocil ordered a telephone hearing about the fairness of the parties’ FLSA settlement.

Who this affects

The plaintiff and defendants in the action were ordered to attend the settlement-fairness hearing.

What happened

In Zarate v. New Green Emporium Corp., the court received the plaintiff’s letter and supporting documents concerning the fairness of the parties’ settlement under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The court ordered the parties to attend a fairness hearing by telephone on August 11, 2020, at 10:00 a.m. The order provided the telephone number and access code for the hearing.

Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil ordered the hearing but did not state in this order whether the settlement was approved or rejected.

The detailed version

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

Case
Zarate v. New Green Emporium Corp. · No. 1:17-cv-00670
Judge
Vyskocil
Date
July 29, 2020

Background Luis Zarate brought the action individually and on behalf of others similarly situated against New Green Emporium Corp., doing business as Green Emporium, and three individual defendants. The opinion states that the court received the plaintiff’s letter and documents supporting the fairness of a settlement under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The court cited Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, a decision concerning review of FLSA settlements.

Order The court ordered the parties to attend a fairness hearing on August 11, 2020, at 10:00 a.m. The hearing was to be held by telephone. The order supplied the telephone number and access code and stated that the court would join after all parties were on the line.

What the Order Did Not Decide This order scheduled the fairness hearing. It does not state that the court approved or rejected the settlement.

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.