|
GPO
Mar 09 2022
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION re 11-12: As explained in the attached Report and Recommendation, plaintiff's motion for injunctive relief is deficient under Local Rule 7.1(a). Thus, the undersigned respectfully recommends that the District Court deny plaintiff's motion without prejudice and with leave to file a motion that complies with this District's Local Rules. Objections to the Report and Recommendation are due by 3/23/2022.So Ordered by Chief Magistrate Judge Cheryl L. Pollak on 3/9/2022. (Henney, Scott)
|
|
GPO
Feb 04 2023
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 21 MOTION to Amend/Correct/Supplement filed by Luciano Santiago : For the reasons outlined in the attached Report and Recommendation, the Court respectfully recommends that plaintiff's motion to amend be granted in part and denied in part. Any objections to the Report and Recommendation due by 2/20/2023. So Ordered by Magistrate Judge Cheryl L. Pollak on 2/4/2023. (MK)
|
|
GPO
Jul 26 2024
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 44 - 45: For the reasons set forth in the attached R&R, the Court respectfully recommends that the district court GRANT plaintiff's Motion 44 insofar as plaintiff seeks to treat the written agreement executed by plaintiff [39-1] as the parties' jointly proposed settlement agreement for purposes of the settlement approval process mandated by Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc., 796 F.3d 199 (2d Cir. 2015), and that Mr. Agadjani's Countermotion 45 be DENIED. However, because the Court is unable to adequately assess the fairness of the proposed settlement and requested attorney's fees based on the documentation submitted to date, the Court recommends that the district court DENY plaintiff's Motion for all purposes other than the limited one noted above, and that plaintiff be granted leave to file a formal motion for settlement approval and for attorney's fees and costs that rectifies the various issues set out in the Court's R&R.Any objections to the R&R are due by 08/12/2024. Plaintiff is directed promptly to serve a copy of this Order on defendants by certified mail, return receipt requested, and to provide the Court with proof of service immediately thereafter. So Ordered by Magistrate Judge Cheryl L. Pollak on 7/26/2024. (DB)
|
|
GPO
Sep 05 2024
ORDER MODIFYING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 48, DENYING 44 Plaintiff's Motion for Settlement Enforcement. The court has reviewed Magistrate Judge Pollak's thorough and well-reasoned Report & Recommendation ("R&R"), entered on July 26, 2024, to which Defendant Agadjani has objected. For the reasons set forth in the attached Memorandum and Order, the Court respectfully modifies Magistrate Judge Pollak's R&R and denies Plaintiff's motion to enforce the settlement agreement without prejudice to the motion being refiled after an evidentiary hearing on the authority of Defendants' former attorneys to enter into a settlement on Defendants' behalf.The parties, including an authorized corporate representative of Defendant Trax (which may be Defendant Agadjani), are ordered to appear for an evidentiary hearing on September 16, 2024, at 11:00am, in Courtroom 6B South. Defendants' former attorneys Ryan Miller and Scott Himes shall also appear. The Court expects to hear testimony from Defendant Agadjani and his then-counsel, Ryan Miller and Scott Himes. If the parties wish to submit evidence relevant to whether Defendants' former counsel had authority to settle this case on the terms specified, or to call other witnesses, they should so advise the Court no later than September 11, 2024. All exhibits shall be submitted by September 11, 2024. The Clerk of Court shall serve notice of the hearing on Defendants' former counsel via email. Defendants' former counsel shall provide Defendant Agadjani with a copy of this Order as well as notice of the hearing and confirm on the docket that Defendant Agadjani was notified by September 6, 2024. Ordered by Judge Kiyo A. Matsumoto on 9/5/2024. (SP)
|
|
GPO
Oct 04 2024
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: For the reasons set forth in the attached Order, the Court finds that Defendants' former counsel, Mr. Miller and Mr. Himes, possessed actual authority to negotiate and enter into a settlement on Defendants' behalf, and Mr. Agadjani has failed to present evidence rebutting the presumption that his attorneys acted to settle this action with his authority. Accordingly, the Court finds that on November 27, 2023, the parties entered into a binding oral agreement to settle the instant case for $180,000, paid over six months in equal monthly payments of $30,000, to be secured by a confession of judgment of $650,000 to be executed by Defendants. Notwithstanding the fact that an enforceable settlement agreement has been reached, the Court declines to approve the parties' proposed settlement. Plaintiff is directed to submit a revised Cheeks letter that satisfactorily address the Court's concerns about Plaintiff's range of possible recovery and attorney's fees set forth in the attached order. Plaintiff's letter shall be submitted no later than October 10, 2024, and shall include as an exhibit detailed billing records substantiating Plaintiff's counsel's fee and cost requests, and a contingency agreement if one exists. The Clerk of Court shall serve a copy of this Memorandum and Order on Defendants and file proof of service on the docket no later than October 7, 2024. Ordered by Judge Kiyo A. Matsumoto on 10/4/2024. (SP)
|
|
GPO
Oct 11 2024
MEMORANDUM AND OPINION: For the reasons set forth in the attached Order, Plaintiff's request for approval of the Proposed Settlement Agreement is granted. Now that the settlement has been approved, the Defendants' obligations are in effect. The Court retains jurisdiction to enforce the Settlement Agreement. Should Defendants fail to meet their obligations under the Parties' settlement agreement, Plaintiff may move to enforce the terms of the Settlement Agreement, as incorporated herein, including entering judgment for the amount, $650,000, stated in the Confession of Judgment, that was described in an email to Defendants from the Defendants former counsel on December 8, 2023. (ECF No. 56-6, Exhibit F to the Miller Decl., at 1 (noting that the confession of judgment is "security for being entitled to pay over six months" and can be used "only if one of the $30k payments is not made" after "notice and 30 days to cure the nonpayment").) The Court notes, and emphasizes to Defendants, that such judgment would be entered jointly and severally against both Defendant Agadjani and Trax NYC Corp. pursuant to the terms of the Settlement Agreement. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case, serve a copy of this Memorandum and Order on Defendants, and file proof of service on the docket no later than October 15, 2024. Ordered by Judge Kiyo A. Matsumoto on 10/11/2024. (SP)
|