Skip to content.
About GPO   |   Newsroom/Media   |   Congressional Relations   |   Inspector General   |   Careers   |   Contact   |   askGPO   |   Help  

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)

16-2673 - Paez et al v. Whaleneck Enterprises et al

Download Files


Document in Context
16-2673 - Paez et al v. Whaleneck Enterprises et al
June 14, 2017
PDF | More
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION & ORDER re 16 Motion for Settlement; 17 Motion for Reconsideration. Upon reconsideration, the Court finds that in this particular situation, judicial approval of the Defendants offer of judgment pursuant to Rule 68 is unnecessary. Rule 68 explicitly states that after either party files a notice of acceptance of an offer of judgment, the Clerk of the Court must then enter judgment. This Court will not ignore such plainly mandatory language; holding otherwise would constitute a judicial rewriting of Rule 68. Arzeno v. Big B World, Inc., 317 F.R.D. 440, 441 (S.D.N.Y. 2016) Accordingly, this Court joins the majority of district courts in this Circuit [that] have held that judicial approval is not required for Rule 68 offers of judgment. Anwar, 2017 WL 455416 at *1. The Clerk of the Court is respectfully directed to enter judgment in favor of the Plaintiffs consistent with the notice of acceptance [ECF No. 15], and to close the case. SEE ATTACHED DECISION for details. It is SO ORDERED by Judge Arthur D. Spatt on 6/14/2017. (Coleman, Laurie)