Escobar Montiel v. Shamrock Saloon II LLC
- Paul Engelmayer
- 1:17-cv-05550-PAE
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Escobar Montiel v. Shamrock Saloon II LLC, Judge Engelmayer invited plaintiffs to request reopening after defendants missed a settlement payment.
The plaintiffs and defendants in the wage-and-hour action, particularly the defendants accused of missing the first settlement installment.
What happened
Escobar Montiel v. Shamrock Saloon II LLC is a wage case under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law. The parties submitted a proposed settlement, which the court approved on September 10, 2019.
Plaintiffs reported that defendants had not made the settlement’s first installment payment, due October 10, 2019, and asked to reopen the case. Defendants did not oppose the request by the court’s August 7, 2020 deadline.
Judge Engelmayer said the court was prepared to reopen the case and cancel the settlement, but he did not do so in this order. He directed plaintiffs to submit a letter requesting those actions and proposing an expedited schedule for pretrial proceedings.
The detailed version
- Escobar Montiel v. Shamrock Saloon II LLC · No. 1:17-cv-05550-PAE
- Paul Engelmayer
- Aug. 18, 2020
Background
This action asserts claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law. On September 6, 2019, the parties submitted a proposed settlement agreement. On September 10, 2019, the court reviewed and approved that agreement.
Plaintiffs’ Request
Plaintiffs filed a letter on July 19, 2020, stating that defendants had failed to make the agreement’s first installment payment, which was due October 10, 2019. Plaintiffs requested that the action be reopened. The court set August 7, 2020, as the deadline for defendants’ opposition, but defendants filed no opposition.
Order
The court stated that it was prepared to reopen the case and vacate, or cancel, the settlement agreement. It did not itself take those actions in this order. Instead, Judge Paul A. Engelmayer directed plaintiffs to submit a letter by August 21, 2020, if they wished to reopen the case and vacate the agreement. The letter was to propose an expedited schedule for completing pretrial proceedings. Defendants’ response, if any, to that proposed schedule was due August 25, 2020.
Disposition
The order conditionally invited plaintiffs to make a further request; it did not state that the case had been reopened or that the settlement agreement had been vacated.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.