Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 23, 2021

Gonzalez Basurto v. 3 East 48th Rest. Inc.

Judge
John Cronan
Docket
1:20-cv-05736
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureClass Action
In one sentence

In Gonzalez Basurto v. 3 East 48th Rest. Inc., Judge Cronan ordered the parties to submit their settlement for required court approval.

Who this affects

The parties to the case, including Segundo Gonzalez Basurto and the defendants. The opinion does not specify which other people, if any, would be affected by the proposed settlement.

What happened

Segundo Gonzalez Basurto brought this case individually and on behalf of others similarly situated against 3 East 48th Rest. Inc. and other defendants. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims.

The parties told the court that they reached an agreement on all issues during court-annexed mediation. The opinion does not provide the agreement’s terms.

Judge John P. Cronan ordered the parties to submit any settlement requiring court approval under Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, along with other necessary information, by March 19, 2021.

The detailed version

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

Case
Gonzalez Basurto v. 3 East 48th Rest. Inc. · No. 1:20-cv-05736
Judge
John Cronan
Date
Feb. 23, 2021

Background

Segundo Gonzalez Basurto sued 3 East 48th Rest. Inc. and other defendants, both individually and on behalf of others similarly situated. The opinion does not state the claims or provide additional facts about the dispute.

Mediation and Settlement

The court stated that the parties reached an agreement on all issues while participating in the court-annexed Mediation Program. The opinion does not describe the settlement’s terms or state whether the court had approved it.

Order

Judge John P. Cronan ordered the parties to submit any settlement requiring court approval under Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, 796 F.3d 199 (2d Cir. 2015), together with any other necessary information, by March 19, 2021. This order did not decide the underlying 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.