Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 27, 2021

Marquez de la Cruz v. Estrellita Poblana, Inc.

Judge
Gabriel Gorenstein
Docket
1:20-cv-05437
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
EmploymentFlsaCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Marquez de la Cruz v. Estrellita Poblana, Judge Gorenstein approved the settlement, dismissed the case with prejudice, and retained jurisdiction to enforce it.

Who this affects

The plaintiffs and defendants in this Fair Labor Standards Act action, including the parties bound by the approved settlement agreement.

What happened

Marquez de la Cruz v. Estrellita Poblana involved claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The parties agreed that Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein would decide the matter and submitted a proposed settlement.

After reviewing the agreement, the court found that it was fair and reasonable and approved it. The opinion does not describe the settlement’s terms.

Judge Gorenstein dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs except as provided in the settlement agreement. The court retained jurisdiction to enforce the settlement, declared pending motions moot, and directed the Clerk to close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Marquez de la Cruz v. Estrellita Poblana, Inc. · No. 1:20-cv-05437
Judge
Gabriel Gorenstein
Date
Aug. 27, 2021

Background

The plaintiffs asserted claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act. On May 17, 2021, the parties consented to have the matter decided by Judge Gorenstein under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). On August 26, 2021, they filed a proposed settlement agreement.

Settlement Review

The court reviewed the proposed agreement under Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc., which requires review of certain Fair Labor Standards Act settlements. The court found that the settlement was fair and reasonable and approved it. The opinion does not state the agreement’s terms.

Disposition

Judge Gorenstein ordered that the action be dismissed with prejudice and without costs, except as may be stated in the settlement agreement. The court retained jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement. It also ruled that any pending motions were moot and requested that the Clerk 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.