Morales v. Tap House LLC
- Lorna Schofield
- 1:20-cv-04511
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Morales v. Tap House LLC, Judge Schofield ordered settlement filings and an explanation for missed deadlines by noon on November 10, 2020.
The order affected Isaac Morales, the defendants, and their counsel by requiring settlement-related filings and an explanation for missed deadlines. It warned that further late submissions could result in sanctions or prejudice.
What happened
Morales v. Tap House LLC concerns the parties’ proposed settlement and the information the court needed to decide whether it was fair and reasonable. The court had already granted two extensions for the parties to provide that information, but they had not done so.
The court ordered the parties to file the settlement agreement, a joint letter with supporting evidence about the settlement’s fairness, and a detailed accounting of counsel’s time and expenses if fees were being requested. The parties also had to explain why they had not complied with earlier court orders.
Judge Lorna G. Schofield set noon on November 10, 2020, as the final stated deadline and warned that further late submissions could lead to sanctions or prejudice. This order required additional filings; it did not decide whether to approve the settlement.
The detailed version
- Morales v. Tap House LLC · No. 1:20-cv-04511
- Lorna Schofield
- Nov. 9, 2020
Background
The plaintiff, Isaac Morales, sued Tap House LLC and other defendants on behalf of himself and others similarly situated. The opinion addresses the parties’ proposed settlement and the materials needed for the court to determine whether the settlement was fair and reasonable.
The court had previously granted the parties a one-week extension to submit the necessary information. After the parties missed that deadline, the court granted another extension through November 4, 2020. The parties still had not submitted the required materials.
Order
The court ordered the parties to file, as soon as possible and no later than noon on November 10, 2020:
- the settlement agreement; - a joint letter with supporting evidence addressing the findings needed to approve the settlement as fair and reasonable; and - a joint letter explaining why the parties had not complied with the court’s earlier orders.
If counsel sought attorneys’ fees and expenses, the supporting letter also had to include a detailed breakdown of counsel’s time and expenses. The court reminded the parties that court-ordered deadlines were mandatory and warned that further untimely submissions could result in sanctions or prejudice.
Disposition
Judge Lorna G. Schofield entered an order requiring the specified filings and explanation by the stated deadline. The opinion does not state that the court approved or rejected the settlement, and it does not decide the underlying claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.