Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 20, 2022

Galvez Duran v. T&S Restaurant LLC

Judge
Sarah Netburn
Docket
1:20-cv-07090
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
FlsaCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Galvez Duran v. T&S Restaurant, Judge Netburn ordered the parties to submit their proposed settlement for review by April 25, 2022.

Who this affects

The parties to Nestor Ismael Galvez Duran’s Fair Labor Standards Act case against T&S Restaurant LLC and the other named defendants.

What happened

In Galvez Duran v. T&S Restaurant LLC, the parties reached a settlement in principle in a Fair Labor Standards Act case and agreed that Judge Sarah Netburn could review whether the settlement was fair.

Judge Netburn instructed the parties to submit the signed settlement agreement by April 25, 2022. She also stated that the agreement must be filed publicly unless a party could meet the legal standard for sealing it.

The order did not approve or reject the settlement. Judge Sarah Netburn issued instructions for the court’s settlement review.

The detailed version

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

Case
Galvez Duran v. T&S Restaurant LLC · No. 1:20-cv-07090
Judge
Sarah Netburn
Date
Apr. 20, 2022

Background

Nestor Ismael Galvez Duran brought a case under the Fair Labor Standards Act, a federal law governing matters such as minimum wages and overtime. The parties told the court that they had agreed to a settlement in principle and consented to Judge Sarah Netburn’s jurisdiction to review whether the settlement was fair.

Order

The court instructed the parties to submit the executed settlement agreement for review no later than Monday, April 25, 2022. The court also ordered that the agreement be filed publicly through the court’s electronic filing system unless a party established a basis for sealing it under the standard identified in Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga.

Disposition

The order set the procedure for reviewing the proposed settlement. It did not state that the court had approved or rejected the settlement.

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.