Barranco v. La Isla Restaurant, Inc.
- Gabriel Gorenstein
- 1:22-cv-01323
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Barranco v. La Isla Restaurant, Judge Gorenstein approved the parties’ fair and reasonable settlement and dismissed the action with prejudice.
Daniel Barranco and the defendants, including La Isla Restaurant, Inc., are affected by the approved settlement and dismissal. The court also retained jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement.
What happened
Daniel Barranco sued La Isla Restaurant, Inc. and other defendants under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The parties agreed that Magistrate Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein could decide the case and submitted a proposed settlement for approval.
The court reviewed the proposed settlement and found it fair and reasonable. The court conditioned approval on settlement payments being made to Barranco immediately and in the same proportion as his entitlement to the total settlement, unless the parties explained and obtained approval for a different arrangement.
In Barranco v. La Isla Restaurant, Inc., Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein approved the settlement, dismissed the action with prejudice and without costs except as provided in the settlement agreement, and retained jurisdiction to enforce the agreement. Any pending motions were declared moot, and the clerk was directed to close the case.
The detailed version
- Barranco v. La Isla Restaurant, Inc. · No. 1:22-cv-01323
- Gabriel Gorenstein
- Dec. 23, 2022
Background
Daniel Barranco brought claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act against La Isla Restaurant, Inc. and other defendants. On March 25, 2022, the parties consented to have the matter decided by United States Magistrate Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). On December 22, 2022, the parties submitted a proposed settlement agreement.
Settlement Review
The court reviewed the proposed settlement under Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc., which requires judicial review of certain Fair Labor Standards Act settlements. The court found the settlement fair and reasonable and approved it.
The approval was conditioned on each payment under the settlement being paid immediately to Barranco in the same proportion as he was entitled to receive from the total settlement payment, or in a greater amount if the attorney preferred. The court stated that the parties should explain and seek approval of a different arrangement if that was not their intention.
Disposition
Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein dismissed the action with prejudice and without costs, except as provided in the settlement agreement. The court retained jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement, declared any pending motions moot, and requested that the clerk close the case.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.