Enriquez v. Cherry Hill Market corp et al
Plaintiff: Jose Enriquez
Defendant: Cherry Hill Gourmet, Inc., Cherry Hill Market corp and David Isaev
Case Number: 1:2010cv05616
Filed: December 3, 2010
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of New York
Office: Brooklyn Office
Presiding Judge: Frederic Block
Presiding Judge: Andrew L. Carter
Nature of Suit: Labor: Fair Standards
Cause of Action: 29 U.S.C. ยง 206 Collect Unpaid Wages
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
September 25, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 94 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: The defendants objections 85 are overruled and Magistrate Judge Gos rulings are affirmed. Ordered by Judge Frederic Block on 9/25/2014. (Innelli, Michael)
June 25, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 75 MEMORANDUM & ORDER: Plaintiff's motion 68 for reconsideration is DEINED. Ordered by Judge Frederic Block on 6/25/2014. (Innelli, Michael)
September 30, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 66 MEMORANDUM & ORDER: The Court concludes that Enriquez has failed to establish the predominance and superiority requirements of Rule 23(b)(3). Accordingly, plaintiff's motion 60 for class certification is denied. Ordered by Judge Frederic Block on 9/30/2013. (Innelli, Michael)
December 20, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 56 MEMORANDUM & ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: The R&R contains no error, let alone plain error. Accordingly, the Court adopts it without de novo review. See attached memorandum and order for details. Ordered by Judge Frederic Block on 12/20/2012. (Innelli, Michael)
February 10, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 36 MEMORANDUM & ORDER: The plaintiffs motion 24 for conditional certification is granted. The plaintiffs are directed to file and serve an amended proposed notice and consent form that complies with this memorandum and order by February 21, 2012. The parties are directed to appear for a status conference on February 23, 2012, at 3 p.m., to discuss the amended notice and consent form. Following the conference, the Court will issue an order directing the timing and manner of notice. See attached memorandum and order for details. Ordered by Senior Judge Frederic Block on 2/10/2012. (Innelli, Michael)
Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the New York Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Enriquez v. Cherry Hill Market corp et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Cherry Hill Gourmet, Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Cherry Hill Market corp
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: David Isaev
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Jose Enriquez
Represented By: Lloyd Robert Ambinder
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?