Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 11, 2022

Leal Florez v. Goldlyn LLC

Judge
Katherine Failla
Docket
1:20-cv-05243
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureContract
In one sentence

In Leal Florez v. Goldlyn LLC, Judge Failla granted the parties’ request for more time to submit their settlement agreement and directed termination of motion 51.

Who this affects

The parties and their attorneys received additional time to submit the settlement agreement; the Clerk of Court was directed to terminate motion 51.

What happened

In Leal Florez v. Goldlyn LLC, the plaintiffs asked for a two-week extension to submit a settlement agreement for court approval. The request said the parties had agreed on a final form but still needed to review it with the individual parties and obtain signatures.

The defendants consented to the extension. The existing deadline was March 11, 2022.

Judge Failla granted the application and directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the motion at docket entry 51. The order did not approve the settlement or decide the underlying claims.

The detailed version

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

Case
Leal Florez v. Goldlyn LLC · No. 1:20-cv-05243
Judge
Katherine Failla
Date
Mar. 11, 2022

Background

The plaintiffs, through their attorney, asked the court for a two-week extension to submit their settlement agreement for court approval. The request stated that the parties had agreed on a final form of the agreement but needed additional time to review it with the individual parties and obtain their signatures. The defendants consented to the request. The deadline for submitting the agreement was March 11, 2022.

Ruling

Judge Katherine Polk Failla granted the application. She directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the motion at docket entry 51.

Effect of the Order

The opinion does not state that the court approved the settlement agreement, and it does not decide the underlying claims. It grants additional time for submitting the agreement and closes the referenced motion on the docket.

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.