Service v. All Bright Dental of NY, P.C.
- Andrew Carter
- 1:20-cv-01825
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Service v. All Bright Dental of NY, P.C., Judge Carter approved the parties’ settlement as fair, reasonable, and adequate to address Service’s claims.
Shante Service and the defendants, including All Bright Dental of NY, P.C., were affected by the court’s approval of their settlement agreement.
What happened
In Service v. All Bright Dental of NY, P.C., the parties submitted a settlement agreement to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or the agreement’s terms.
The court found that the settlement was fair, reasonable, and adequate to address the plaintiff’s claims. It relied on the parties’ letter motion, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41, and the Second Circuit’s decision in Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House Inc.
Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. approved the settlement agreement. The order does not state any additional disposition of the case.
The detailed version
- Service v. All Bright Dental of NY, P.C. · No. 1:20-cv-01825
- Andrew Carter
- Aug. 26, 2020
Background
The parties presented a settlement agreement to the court. The opinion does not identify the claims asserted by Shante Service or provide the settlement’s financial or other terms.
Court’s Analysis
The court concluded that the settlement agreement was fair and reasonable and adequately addressed Service’s claims. The court acted under Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and cited Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House Inc., 796 F.3d 199 (2d Cir. 2015). The court also relied on the parties’ letter motion seeking approval of the agreement.
Disposition
The court approved the settlement agreement. The order did not state that any motion or claim was dismissed with or without prejudice, and it did not describe any further relief.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.