Mauricio v. Tiramisu Restaurant, LLC
- James Cott
- 1:22-cv-02500
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Mauricio v. Tiramisu Restaurant, Judge Cott directed the parties to submit a settlement agreement for court approval by September 2, 2022.
Juan Lopez Mauricio and Tiramisu Restaurant, LLC, et al., who were directed to submit consent and settlement-approval papers by September 2, 2022.
What happened
In Mauricio v. Tiramisu Restaurant, LLC, the parties attended a settlement conference and reached a settlement in principle.
The court directed them to file a joint letter motion and their fully signed settlement agreement by September 2, 2022. The motion must explain why the settlement is fair and reasonable and complies with the relevant Second Circuit decision.
Judge James L. Cott also directed the parties to submit a consent form allowing him to handle the case and review the settlement. This order did not approve the settlement; it set the process for requesting approval.
The detailed version
- Mauricio v. Tiramisu Restaurant, LLC · No. 1:22-cv-02500
- James Cott
- Aug. 4, 2022
Background
The parties appeared before Judge James L. Cott for a settlement conference and reached a settlement in principle. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or the proposed settlement's terms.
Order
The parties stated that they would consent to Judge Cott's jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), which would allow him to handle the case as a magistrate judge and review the settlement based on his familiarity with its terms. They were directed to submit the consent form as soon as practicable and no later than September 2, 2022.
The court also ordered the parties to file, by September 2, 2022, a joint letter motion with their fully executed settlement agreement requesting court approval. The motion must explain why the proposed settlement is fair and reasonable and complies with the Second Circuit's decision in Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc. The order referred the parties to other decisions for guidance on settlement provisions involving social-media publicity, reemployment, communications with the media, releases, non-disparagement, confidentiality, and related terms.
Disposition
Judge Cott ordered the parties to submit the consent form, joint letter motion, and fully executed settlement agreement by the stated deadline. The order did not approve the settlement or resolve the underlying case.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.