Espinoza v. New York Insulation, Inc.
- Clarke
- 1:22-cv-04715
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Espinoza v. New York Insulation, Judge Clarke scheduled a settlement-review conference and said she intended to rule on the parties’ motion.
Counsel for all parties and the parties seeking court review of their proposed settlement agreement.
What happened
In Espinoza v. New York Insulation, Inc., the court ordered counsel for all parties to attend a conference about their proposed settlement agreement. The order does not describe the underlying claims.
The conference was scheduled for January 31, 2024, at 10:00 a.m. and was to take place through Microsoft Teams. The parties were expected to discuss every term of their agreement and whether those terms were consistent with the court’s cited authority, Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc.
Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke stated that she intended to rule on the parties’ motion at the conference. The order did not approve or reject the settlement.
The detailed version
- Espinoza v. New York Insulation, Inc. · No. 1:22-cv-04715
- Clarke
- Jan. 18, 2024
Background
The opinion is a conference order in a case brought by multiple plaintiffs against New York Insulation, Inc., New York Insulation, LLC, Anthony Cardinale, Antonio Marcial, and Cesar Balseca. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or the terms of the proposed settlement.
Order
The court directed counsel for all parties to appear for a conference on January 31, 2024, at 10:00 a.m. through Microsoft Teams. The purpose was to discuss the terms of the parties’ proposed settlement agreement. The court cited Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc. and instructed the parties to be prepared to discuss all agreement terms and the extent to which they were consistent with that decision.
Disposition
Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke stated that the court intended to rule on the parties’ motion at the conference. This order itself did not grant or deny the motion and did not approve or reject the settlement.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.