Gilmore v. The City of New York
- Barbara Moses
- 1:19-cv-06091
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Gilmore v. City of New York, Judge Moses requested a retainer agreement and supplemental briefing regarding approval of the proposed settlement.
The plaintiffs, plaintiffs’ counsel, and the City of New York were affected because the court required additional materials before considering approval of their proposed settlement.
What happened
In Gilmore v. The City of New York, the parties asked the court to approve their proposed settlement agreement. The court received that request but noted that plaintiffs’ counsel had not provided a required copy of the retainer agreement.
The court also asked the parties to address whether the fact that only four of nine former plaintiffs would receive money should affect the evaluation of the results counsel obtained for their clients.
Judge Moses required the parties to submit the missing retainer agreement and supplemental letter brief by February 26, 2021. The order did not decide whether to approve the settlement.
The detailed version
- Gilmore v. The City of New York · No. 1:19-cv-06091
- Barbara Moses
- Feb. 19, 2021
Background
The parties submitted a letter-motion asking the court to approve a proposed settlement agreement under the procedure discussed in Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or the settlement’s terms.
Issues Identified by the Court
Plaintiffs’ counsel had not attached the retainer agreement with the plaintiffs, even though a January 19, 2021 order required that document. The court also requested briefing on whether, and to what extent, it should consider that only four of the nine people who had previously been plaintiffs would receive any recovery when assessing the “degree of success” counsel obtained for their clients. The court cited Fisher v. SD Protection Inc. on that issue.
Order
The court required the parties to submit the requested supplemental materials no later than February 26, 2021. Judge Barbara Moses did not rule on approval or rejection of the proposed settlement in this order.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.