Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled May 11, 2023

Peralta v. Victor's Cafe 52nd Street, Inc.

Judge
Andrew Carter
Docket
1:22-cv-08915
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
FlsaCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Peralta v. Victor’s Cafe 52nd Street, Inc., Judge Carter dismissed the labor-law case without prejudice after Peralta chose to pursue arbitration.

Who this affects

Peralta and the three defendants—Victor’s Cafe 52nd Street, Inc., Sonia Zaldivar, and Monica Zaldivar—were affected by the dismissal; the action was closed without prejudice, and the opinion states that Peralta intended to pursue the claims in arbitration.

What happened

In Peralta v. Victor’s Cafe 52nd Street, Inc., Peralta sued Victor’s Cafe 52nd Street, Inc., Sonia Zaldivar, and Monica Zaldivar under federal and New York wage laws.

Peralta later filed a notice voluntarily dismissing his claims without prejudice and said he intended to pursue them in arbitration. Neither side asked the court to order arbitration or keep the case open, and the parties had not settled.

Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. dismissed the action without prejudice and directed the clerk to close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Peralta v. Victor's Cafe 52nd Street, Inc. · No. 1:22-cv-08915
Judge
Andrew Carter
Date
May 11, 2023

Background

Peralta brought the action against Victor’s Cafe 52nd Street, Inc., Sonia Zaldivar, and Monica Zaldivar. He alleged violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act, a federal wage law, and the New York Labor Law.

Voluntary dismissal and arbitration

Peralta filed a notice voluntarily dismissing his claims without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41. He stated that he intended to pursue the claims in arbitration. Neither party moved to compel arbitration or asked the court to keep the case open while arbitration proceeded. Peralta later clarified that the parties had not settled.

The court therefore found that no Fair Labor Standards Act settlement existed. The opinion cited the rule that a court must review a Fair Labor Standards Act settlement for fairness when there is a settlement, but that no such review is required when the plaintiff voluntarily dismisses without a settlement.

Disposition

The court dismissed the action without prejudice and directed the clerk to terminate the case.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.