Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 4, 2021

Molina v. Huaxcuaxtla Restaurant Corp.

Judge
Robert Lehrburger
Docket
1:20-cv-02481
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Molina v. Huaxcuaxtla Restaurant Corp., Judge Schofield ordered settlement materials and fairness evidence filed after the parties reported a settlement in principle.

Who this affects

The plaintiffs and defendants in the case, who were required to submit settlement materials and supporting evidence by February 25, 2021.

What happened

In Molina v. Huaxcuaxtla Restaurant Corp., the court was told that the parties had reached a settlement in principle.

The court required the parties to file the settlement agreement and a joint letter with evidence addressing whether the proposed settlement was fair and reasonable. The filing was due by February 25, 2021. If counsel sought fees and expenses, the letter also had to include a detailed accounting of counsel’s time and expenses.

Judge Lorna G. Schofield also canceled all pending conferences and deadlines. The order did not decide the merits of the parties’ claims or approve the settlement.

The detailed version

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

Case
Molina v. Huaxcuaxtla Restaurant Corp. · No. 1:20-cv-02481
Judge
Robert Lehrburger
Date
Feb. 4, 2021

Background

The court stated that it had been informed that the parties had reached a settlement in principle. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims.

Order

The court ordered the parties to file, by February 25, 2021:

1. The settlement agreement; and 2. A joint letter with supporting evidence addressing the findings the court would need to make before approving the settlement as fair and reasonable.

The order further required a detailed breakdown of counsel’s time and expenses if counsel sought attorneys’ fees and expenses. It also canceled any pending conferences and deadlines.

Disposition

This was a procedural order concerning review of a proposed settlement. The court did not approve or reject the settlement and did not decide the merits of the claims.

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.