Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 28, 2020

Hernandez v. Medi Winebar, LLC

Judge
Paul Gardephe
Docket
1:19-cv-01295
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Hernandez v. Medi Winebar, Judge Cave granted the parties’ request to extend their settlement-filing deadline to November 10, 2020.

Who this affects

The parties in Hernandez v. Medi Winebar, LLC, whose deadline to submit settlement materials for court review was extended to November 10, 2020.

What happened

In Hernandez v. Medi Winebar, LLC, the parties jointly asked for more time to submit their settlement agreement and request for court approval. They said they were still working on those materials, and the defendants agreed to the extension.

The court granted the request and extended the deadline to November 10, 2020. The court noted that this was the parties’ third request for an extension and reminded them that future requests must follow the court’s rules.

Judge Sarah L. Cave issued the order. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the parties’ letter-motion requesting the extension; the order did not approve the settlement itself.

The detailed version

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

Case
Hernandez v. Medi Winebar, LLC · No. 1:19-cv-01295
Judge
Paul Gardephe
Date
Oct. 28, 2020

Background

The parties jointly requested an extension of the deadline to submit their settlement agreement and motion for court review under Cheeks v. House, Inc. The plaintiff’s counsel stated that the parties needed additional time because they were still working on the agreement and the approval materials. The defendants consented to the request.

Ruling

Judge Sarah L. Cave granted the joint letter-motion and extended the deadline until November 10, 2020. The court noted that this was the parties’ third request to extend the deadline and stated that future extension requests must comply with the court’s Individual Practices in Civil Cases. The Clerk of Court was directed to close ECF No. 61. The order extended the filing deadline; it did not itself approve 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.