Ramirez et al v. Riverbay Corp.
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|Date Filed||#||Document Text|
|August 1, 2014
OPINION AND ORDER: re: 129 MOTION to Certify Class. filed by Jonathan Frias, Rosaly Ramirez, Linda Williams, Katherine Bell, Lorna Thomas. The Court has considered all of the arguments of the parties. To the extent not specifically addresse d above, the remaining arguments are either moot or without merit. For the reasons explained above, the plaintiffs' motion for class certification is granted. The Clerk is directed to close Docket No. 129.The plaintiffs should provide a proposed order for class notice by August 15, 2014. The defendants may provide any objections and response by August 29, 2014.SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge John G. Koeltl on 8/01/2014) (ama)
|January 30, 2014
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER 103917: The Court accepts the agreed-upon language of the notice, and accepts in part and rejects in part the defendants' proposed modifications to the notice. Accordingly, the defendants' proposed modification s to Sections 1, 10, and 13 advising plaintiffs of the right not to join the lawsuit are rejected. The proposed addition of the specific language quoted here is therefore accepted. Accordingly, the defendants proposed modification to Section 5 is r ejected. For precisely the reasons expressed in that Opinion, the defendants' proposed modification to Section 10 of the notice advising the plaintiffs of their right to pursue alternatives to litigation is rejected. This language has the prim ary effect of attempting to dissuade putative members of the collective from pursing possibly valid claims, and is therefore rejected. This is a transparent scare tactic that may deter plaintiffs with possibly valid claims from joining the lawsuit, and this proposal is therefore rejected. Accordingly, this proposed addition to the consent-to-join form is rejected. For the foregoing reasons, the language of the proposed notice that has been agreed upon by the parties is accepted, and the defendants' proposed modifications to the agreed-upon language are accepted in part and rejected in part, as indicated above. (Signed by Judge John G. Koeltl on 1/30/2014) (djc) Modified on 1/31/2014 (djc). Modified on 1/31/2014 (nt).
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 Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
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?