Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Nov. 18, 2020

Martinez v. Felipe's Pizza and Restaurant, Inc.

Judge
Stewart Aaron
Docket
1:19-cv-06136
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
FlsaCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Martinez v. Felipe’s Pizza, Judge Aaron approved the parties’ fair wage-law settlement and dismissed the action with prejudice.

Who this affects

The settlement and dismissal affect Fortino Martinez and Felipe’s Pizza and Restaurant, Inc., et al. The action is dismissed with prejudice, and the court retains jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement.

What happened

In Fortino Martinez v. Felipe’s Pizza and Restaurant, Inc., et al., the parties reached a settlement after a settlement conference. The case included one or more claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act, a federal wage-and-hour law.

The parties submitted their proposed agreement, and the court reviewed it. The court found the settlement fair and reasonable and approved it.

Judge Stewart D. Aaron dismissed the action with prejudice and without costs, except as provided in the settlement agreement. The court retained jurisdiction to enforce the settlement.

The detailed version

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

Case
Martinez v. Felipe's Pizza and Restaurant, Inc. · No. 1:19-cv-06136
Judge
Stewart Aaron
Date
Nov. 18, 2020

Background

The action included one or more claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act, a federal law governing wages and working hours. The parties reached a settlement at a settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron on October 9, 2020. They later consented to have all proceedings handled by him.

Settlement Review

The parties submitted their proposed settlement agreement on November 17, 2020. Applying the standard identified in Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc., the court reviewed the agreement and found it fair and reasonable.

Ruling

Judge Stewart D. Aaron approved the settlement. The action was dismissed with prejudice and without costs, except as stated in the settlement agreement. The court retained jurisdiction, meaning it kept authority, to enforce the settlement agreement.

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.