Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled May 6, 2021

Gomez v. Shine Services LLC

Judge
Barbara Moses
Docket
1:20-cv-04190
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureContract
In one sentence

In Gomez v. Shine Services LLC, Judge Moses approved the revised settlement, dismissed the action with prejudice and without costs, and retained limited enforcement jurisdiction.

Who this affects

Luis Gomez and the defendants, including Shine Services LLC.

What happened

In Gomez v. Shine Services LLC, Luis Gomez and the defendants submitted a revised settlement agreement addressing issues identified in the court’s earlier order.

The court carefully reviewed the revised agreement under the required standard for reviewing employment settlements. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or the settlement’s specific terms.

Judge Barbara Moses approved the revised settlement. The action was dismissed with prejudice and without costs, the court retained jurisdiction only to enforce the agreement, and the Clerk was directed to close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Gomez v. Shine Services LLC · No. 1:20-cv-04190
Judge
Barbara Moses
Date
May 6, 2021

Background

The parties submitted a revised settlement agreement by letter dated May 4, 2021. The revision addressed issues raised in the court’s April 13, 2021 order. The opinion does not state the underlying claims or provide the agreement’s terms.

Court’s Review

Judge Barbara Moses reviewed the revised agreement under Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc., which requires judicial review of certain employment settlements. The court stated that it had carefully reviewed the agreement and found it adequately addressed the previously identified issues.

Ruling and Disposition

The court approved the revised settlement agreement. It dismissed the action with prejudice and without costs. The court retained jurisdiction for the sole purpose of enforcing the agreement, and directed the Clerk of Court to close the case.

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.