Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 14, 2023

Sheth v. Skanska USA Civil Northeast, Inc.

Judge
Gabriel Gorenstein
Docket
1:21-cv-09024
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
FlsaCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Sheth v. Skanska, Judge Gorenstein approved the parties’ fair settlement, dismissed the Fair Labor Standards Act case with prejudice, and retained jurisdiction to enforce it.

Who this affects

The parties to Neha Sheth’s Fair Labor Standards Act case, including Sheth and Skanska USA Civil Northeast, Inc. and the other named defendants.

What happened

In Sheth v. Skanska USA Civil Northeast, Inc., the plaintiff brought claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The parties agreed to have the magistrate judge decide the case and later submitted a proposed settlement.

Judge Gorenstein reviewed the settlement under the required standard and found it fair and reasonable. He approved the settlement.

Judge Gorenstein dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, except as provided in the settlement agreement. He retained jurisdiction to enforce the settlement, ruled that any pending motions were moot, and directed the Clerk to close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Sheth v. Skanska USA Civil Northeast, Inc. · No. 1:21-cv-09024
Judge
Gabriel Gorenstein
Date
Feb. 14, 2023

Background

Neha Sheth’s case included claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act. On September 15, 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 February 13, 2023, the parties submitted a proposed settlement agreement.

Settlement Review

The court reviewed the proposed settlement under the standard required by Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc. The court found that the settlement was fair and reasonable and approved it.

Disposition

Judge Gorenstein dismissed the action with prejudice and without costs, except as provided in the settlement agreement. “With prejudice” means the action is closed on a final basis. The court retained jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement, ruled that any pending motions were moot, and directed the Clerk to close the case.

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.