Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Sept. 13, 2023

Greene v. Teitel Bros., Inc.

Judge
Katharine Parker
Docket
1:22-cv-00723
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
FlsaCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Greene v. Teitel Bros., Inc., Judge Parker approved Santana and Marquez’s settlement and discontinued their claims with prejudice.

Who this affects

Plaintiffs Francisco Santana and Juan Marquez, the defendants, and the plaintiffs’ counsel were affected by the settlement approval. The order discontinued the action as to Santana and Marquez and removed them from the case.

What happened

Greene v. Teitel Bros., Inc. is a wage case under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law. Plaintiffs Francisco Santana and Juan Marquez and the defendants reached an agreement in principle to settle their claims.

The court reviewed the proposed agreement, held a settlement conference, and found that the settlement fairly and reasonably compromised Santana and Marquez’s claims and provided fair compensation for their lawyers. The court also agreed to keep jurisdiction so it could enforce the settlement if necessary.

Judge Parker approved the settlement and discontinued the action as to Santana and Marquez with prejudice and without costs. The Clerk of Court was directed to remove those plaintiffs from the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Greene v. Teitel Bros., Inc. · No. 1:22-cv-00723
Judge
Katharine Parker
Date
Sept. 13, 2023

Background

The action asserted claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), the federal wage-and-hour law, and the New York Labor Law. Plaintiffs Francisco Santana and Juan Marquez and the defendants reached an agreement in principle to resolve the claims involving Santana and Marquez. The parties submitted their proposed settlement agreement for judicial approval. The opinion states that the parties consented to the court’s authority to decide the matter under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).

Court’s Review

Because the settlement involved FLSA claims, the court reviewed whether its terms were fair. The court held a settlement conference and worked with the parties to determine whether the agreement represented a reasonable compromise. It found that the agreement was fair, reasonable, and adequate both to address Santana and Marquez’s claims and to compensate their counsel for legal fees.

Ruling

The court approved the proposed settlement. It retained jurisdiction to enforce the agreement if necessary. As a result of the approval, the action was discontinued as to Santana and Marquez with prejudice and without costs. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate Santana and Marquez as plaintiffs in 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.