Pujols v. RTS Solutionz, Inc.
- Katharine Parker
- 1:20-cv-10373
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Pujols v. RTS Solutionz, Judge Parker ordered the parties to file a motion seeking approval of their reported settlement.
Faustino Pujols and the defendants listed in the two actions, including RTS Solutionz, Inc., Bill Warnick, Kirk R. Fernandez, Jill Armand, and Kylee Cheeney.
What happened
Pujols v. RTS Solutionz, Inc. involves Faustino Pujols and the listed defendants in two related actions identified by docket numbers 20-CV-10373 and 22-CV-5455. The opinion states that Pujols told the court that the parties had reached a settlement agreement.
The court required the parties to file a motion asking for approval of the settlement by May 16, 2023. The order cited a Second Circuit decision requiring court review of certain settlement agreements.
Judge Katharine H. Parker entered the order on April 25, 2023. The order did not decide the underlying claims or state that the settlement had been approved.
The detailed version
- Pujols v. RTS Solutionz, Inc. · No. 1:20-cv-10373
- Katharine Parker
- Apr. 25, 2023
Background
The opinion lists Faustino Pujols as the plaintiff in two actions against RTS Solutionz, Inc., also identified as Solutionz, Inc. and as the successor to Real Time Services, Inc., along with different listed individual defendants. The actions are identified by docket numbers 20-CV-10373 and 22-CV-5455.
Settlement
On April 24, 2023, Pujols informed the court that the parties had reached a settlement agreement. The order cited Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc., a Second Circuit decision, and required the parties to submit a motion for court approval of the settlement. The deadline was Tuesday, May 16, 2023.
Ruling
Judge Katharine H. Parker ordered the parties to file the settlement-approval motion by the stated deadline. The order did not approve the settlement and did not decide the underlying claims. It also did not explain how the two docketed actions were related or whether the settlement covered both actions.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.