Choc v. Corporation 1
- Sidney Stein
- 1:23-cv-03886
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Choc v. Corporation #1, Judge Gary Stein declined to approve the amended settlement unless the parties revised its class-action waiver.
Edgar Choc and the defendants—Corporation #1 d/b/a Jimbo’s Hamburger Palace, 228 Willis Avenue Food LLC, and Misael Vivar—were affected because the court did not approve their amended settlement as submitted and required further action concerning the class- and collective-action waiver.
What happened
In Edgar Choc v. Corporation #1 d/b/a Jimbo’s Hamburger Palace, 228 Willis Avenue Food LLC, and Misael Vivar, the parties asked the court to approve an amended settlement. The court had previously found most of the proposed agreement fair and reasonable but identified problems with Paragraphs 8 and 10.
The court found that the revised non-publicity provision in Paragraph 10 addressed its concerns. It still found a problem with Paragraph 8, which would waive Edgar Choc’s ability to represent or participate in certain class, collective, or multi-party actions. The court said the provision’s wording was unclear and broader than necessary.
The court did not approve the amended settlement as presented. Judge Gary Stein proposed replacement language limiting the waiver to claims covered by the settlement’s release and directed the parties to file a modified agreement or explain how they wished to proceed by January 16, 2024.
The detailed version
- Choc v. Corporation 1 · No. 1:23-cv-03886
- Sidney Stein
- Jan. 8, 2024
Background
The parties jointly sought approval of a settlement agreement and mutual release under the standards discussed in Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc. The court’s earlier order generally found the proposed settlement fair and reasonable but declined to approve it unless the parties modified Paragraphs 8 and 10.
The parties then submitted an amended agreement revising both provisions. The court concluded that the amended Paragraph 10, a non-publicity clause, addressed the court’s concerns and was fair and reasonable.
Paragraph 8
The amended Paragraph 8 was a collective- and class-action waiver. It stated that, if a claim released in Paragraph 5 was not subject to release, Edgar Choc would waive, to the extent permitted by law, any right to represent or participate in a class, collective, or multi-party action involving that claim in which the released parties were involved.
The court did not understand the purpose or effect of the opening language. It reasoned that if a released claim was not actually subject to release because the release was invalid or unenforceable, there was no apparent reason to require Choc to give up participation in a class, collective, or multi-party action concerning that claim.
Ruling and next steps
The court did not approve the amended agreement as submitted. It proposed replacement language limiting the waiver to class, collective, or multi-party proceedings asserting on Choc’s behalf a claim that was subject to the release in Paragraph 5. The court directed that, if the parties accepted the proposed revision, they file a modified amended agreement by January 16, 2024. If they did not, the parties were to file a letter by that date explaining how they wished to proceed.
The opinion is signed by United States Magistrate Judge Gary Stein. The supplied case metadata identifies Sidney Stein as the judge, creating a discrepancy; this summary follows the judge identified in the opinion text.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.