Baten v. 116 West 32 Cafe LLC
- Sarah Netburn
- 1:19-cv-10873
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Baten v. 116 West 32 Cafe LLC, Judge Netburn approved the revised settlement and dismissed the action with prejudice; two plaintiffs had been dismissed without prejudice.
The parties to the action were affected by approval of the revised settlement and dismissal of the action. Hector David Quieju and Manuel Sente Calel were excluded from the settlement and had been dismissed without prejudice.
What happened
Baten v. 116 West 32 Cafe LLC arose after the parties reached settlement terms during two settlement conferences. They submitted a proposed settlement for the court’s review and later submitted an amendment.
Because two plaintiffs, Hector David Quieju and Manuel Sente Calel, were seeking to withdraw their lawyers, the court required a written change to clarify that the settlement did not bind them and to remove them from the settlement’s payment calculation. Those plaintiffs had been dismissed without prejudice.
Judge Sarah Netburn found the revised settlement fair and reasonable, approved it, and dismissed the action with prejudice. She also directed the Clerk of Court to grant the motion filed at ECF No. 66 and close the case.
The detailed version
- Baten v. 116 West 32 Cafe LLC · No. 1:19-cv-10873
- Sarah Netburn
- Sept. 14, 2021
Background
The parties attended settlement conferences before the court on January 6, 2021, and February 8, 2021. At the second conference, they agreed to settlement terms. On August 2, 2021, they submitted a proposed settlement for court review under Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House.
The parties also moved to withdraw as counsel for plaintiffs Hector David Quieju and Manuel Sente Calel. The court ordered them to file a rider to the settlement agreement stating that the agreement did not bind those two plaintiffs and recalculating the settlement consideration to exclude them. The court had dismissed Quieju and Sente Calel without prejudice. On September 10, 2021, the parties submitted an amendment to the settlement agreement.
Ruling
The court determined that the revised settlement was fair and reasonable and APPROVED the settlement. It DISMISSED the action with prejudice. The court directed the Clerk of Court to grant the motion at ECF No. 66 and close the case.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.