Compagnone v. MJ Licensing Company
- Ona Wang
- 1:18-cv-06227-OTW
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Compagnone v. MJ Licensing Company, Magistrate Judge Wang directed the parties to address consent before settlement approval and enforcement.
The parties to the settlement, because their consent would determine whether Magistrate Judge Wang could approve and enforce it.
What happened
Compagnone v. MJ Licensing Company involved a settlement that the parties asked the court to approve.
The parties also appeared to ask the court to retain authority to enforce the settlement. The opinion does not describe the settlement’s terms or decide the underlying dispute.
Magistrate Judge Ona T. Wang directed the parties to meet and discuss whether they all consented to her authority. If they did, the parties had to complete and file a consent form by May 15, 2023.
The detailed version
- Compagnone v. MJ Licensing Company · No. 1:18-cv-06227-OTW
- Ona Wang
- May 10, 2023
Background
The court reviewed ECF Nos. 147 and 148, which indicated that the parties had reached a settlement. They sought approval under Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, a Second Circuit decision requiring court review of certain employment settlements. The settlement agreement also appeared to request that the court exercise jurisdiction to enforce the settlement.
Jurisdiction
The court explained that Magistrate Judge Wang could approve the settlement and enforce it only if the parties consented to her jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(1).
Order
Magistrate Judge Ona T. Wang directed the parties to meet and confer about consent. If all parties consented, the court directed them to complete and file the Consent to Proceed Before a Magistrate Judge form no later than May 15, 2023. The opinion does not state that the settlement was approved or describe any settlement terms.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.