Gonzalez Sanchez v. Y and P Enterprises Inc.
- Analisa Torres
- 1:21-cv-00675
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
Gonzalez Sanchez v. Y and P Enterprises, Judge Torres directed plaintiffs to report whether they had settled with or would dismiss the remaining defendants.
The plaintiffs and the remaining defendants in the case. The order required the plaintiffs to report whether they had settled with or would dismiss the remaining defendants.
What happened
In Gonzalez Sanchez v. Y and P Enterprises, the court reviewed the plaintiffs’ March 30, 2022 letter. The opinion does not explain the underlying claims or the letter’s contents.
The court ordered the plaintiffs to tell the court by April 8, 2022, whether the parties had settled with the remaining defendants or whether the plaintiffs would dismiss those defendants without prejudice because no settlement had been reached.
Judge Analisa Torres stated that any settlement would require court approval and that the case could not be closed until the plaintiffs took one of those actions.
The detailed version
- Gonzalez Sanchez v. Y and P Enterprises Inc. · No. 1:21-cv-00675
- Analisa Torres
- Apr. 1, 2022
Background
The plaintiffs filed a letter dated March 30, 2022. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims, the settlement discussions, or which defendants remained in the case.
Court’s order
The court directed the plaintiffs to inform it by April 8, 2022, whether the parties had reached a settlement with the remaining defendants. The court stated that any such settlement would require court approval. Alternatively, if no settlement had been reached, the plaintiffs could dismiss the remaining defendants without prejudice, meaning they could potentially bring the claims again.
The court stated that it could not close the case until the plaintiffs took one of those actions. Judge Analisa Torres entered the order on April 1, 2022.
Disposition
This was a procedural order addressing settlement approval, possible dismissal, and case closure. It did not decide the merits of the plaintiffs’ claims.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.