Espinoza v. Euro Design and Stone LLC

S.D. New York

Espinoza v. Euro Design and Stone LLC

DecidedMarch 23, 2023

Docket1:20-cv-04381

StatusUnknown

This text of Espinoza v. Euro Design and Stone LLC (Espinoza v. Euro Design and Stone LLC) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Espinoza v. Euro Design and Stone LLC, (S.D.N.Y. 2023).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK CALVIN ADONY MARIANO ESPINOZA, et al.,

Plaintiffs, -v- CIVIL ACTION NO.: 20 Civ. 4381 (SLC)

EURO DESIGN AND STONE LLC, et al., ORDER

Defendants. SARAH L. CAVE, United States Magistrate Judge. The Court is in receipt of the parties’ letter-motion dated March 16, 2023 (ECF No. 170 (the “Letter-Motion”)), requesting the Court approve their negotiated settlement agreement (the “Agreement”), and its corresponding exhibits (ECF Nos. 171 – 171-3 (together, the “Submissions”)), and orders as follows: 1. By Monday, March 27, 2023, the parties shall file a joint letter explaining the following discrepancies the Court has identified with the Submissions, and providing a revised Agreement, as follows: a. The Agreement does not set forth an allocation of how much each Plaintiff shall receive. See Velazquez v. P.J.C.M. Rest. Corp., No. 15 Civ. 3602, 2016 WL 4987156, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 15, 2016) (rejecting a proposed settlement that was unclear about how installment payments were to be distributed). b. The Agreement, in discussing the schedule of payment, specifies that the “[s]ettlement [a]mount shall be distributed in two (2) installments[,]” but later discusses “[i]nstallment [t]wo to [t]en[.]” (Compare ECF No. 170-1 at 2 § 1.a with id. at 2 § 1.a.ii). Dated: New York, New York SO ORDERED. March 23, 2023 Soraton, ZARAH L. CAVE United States Magistrate Judge

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK CALVIN ADONY MARIANO ESPINOZA, et al.,

Plaintiffs, -v- CIVIL ACTION NO.: 20 Civ. 4381 (SLC)

EURO DESIGN AND STONE LLC, et al., ORDER

Defendants. SARAH L. CAVE, United States Magistrate Judge. The Court is in receipt of the parties’ letter-motion dated March 16, 2023 (ECF No. 170 (the “Letter-Motion”)), requesting the Court approve their negotiated settlement agreement (the “Agreement”), and its corresponding exhibits (ECF Nos. 171 – 171-3 (together, the “Submissions”)), and orders as follows: 1. By Monday, March 27, 2023, the parties shall file a joint letter explaining the following discrepancies the Court has identified with the Submissions, and providing a revised Agreement, as follows: a. The Agreement does not set forth an allocation of how much each Plaintiff shall receive. See Velazquez v. P.J.C.M. Rest. Corp., No. 15 Civ. 3602, 2016 WL 4987156, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 15, 2016) (rejecting a proposed settlement that was unclear about how installment payments were to be distributed). b. The Agreement, in discussing the schedule of payment, specifies that the “[s]ettlement [a]mount shall be distributed in two (2) installments[,]” but later discusses “[i]nstallment [t]wo to [t]en[.]” (Compare ECF No. 170-1 at 2 § 1.a with id. at 2 § 1.a.ii). Dated: New York, New York SO ORDERED. March 23, 2023 Soraton, ZARAH L. CAVE United States Magistrate Judge

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Espinoza v. Euro Design and Stone LLC, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/espinoza-v-euro-design-and-stone-llc-nysd-2023.