Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 30, 2020

Montalvo v. Fig & Olive Founders LLC

Judge
Valerie Caproni
Docket
1:20-cv-01603
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureFlsa
In one sentence

In Montalvo v. Fig & Olive Founders LLC, Judge Caproni ordered plaintiffs to report settlement status before any voluntary dismissal.

Who this affects

The named plaintiffs and the plaintiffs’ counsel were required to provide the ordered information or affidavit; the order also concerned the defendants and any proposed settlement of the Fair Labor Standards Act action.

What happened

In Montalvo v. Fig & Olive Founders LLC, the plaintiffs had sued Fig & Olive Founders LLC and Fig & Olive Inc. over alleged violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and related state-law claims.

The plaintiffs filed a notice of voluntary dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a). The court ordered them to tell the court by November 6, 2020, whether the parties had reached a settlement.

Judge Valerie Caproni stated that a settlement-based dismissal could occur only after approval by the court or the Department of Labor. If there was no settlement, plaintiffs’ counsel had to submit a sworn statement confirming that the clients agreed to dismiss without a settlement and had been told they could hire another attorney and refile the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Montalvo v. Fig & Olive Founders LLC · No. 1:20-cv-01603
Judge
Valerie Caproni
Date
Oct. 30, 2020

Background

Alberto Montalvo, Daniel Hurtado, Fredy Ramirez, Jose Ricardo Lopez, Mario Vargas, Mauricio Santos, and Victor Hugo Serrano brought claims on behalf of themselves, an Fair Labor Standards Act collective, and the class against Fig & Olive Founders LLC and Fig & Olive Inc. doing business as Fig & Olive Uptown. The complaint, filed February 24, 2020, alleged violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and related state-law claims.

Plaintiffs’ dismissal notice

On October 30, 2020, the plaintiffs filed a notice of voluntary dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a). The order did not itself dismiss the action. Instead, it required the plaintiffs to inform the court by November 6, 2020, whether the parties had entered into a settlement agreement.

Ruling

Judge Valerie Caproni ordered that, if the parties had settled, the action could not be dismissed unless the settlement agreement was approved by either the court or the Department of Labor. The order cited the Second Circuit’s decision in Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc. If the parties had not settled, plaintiffs’ counsel had to submit a sworn affidavit stating that the clients agreed to dismiss without a settlement and that counsel had informed them of their right to retain another attorney and refile the case.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.