Karim v. We Olive, LLC
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:24-cv-00590
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Karim v. We Olive, Judge Caproni dismissed the case with prejudice after the parties reported an agreement in principle; absent putative class members were not bound.
Jessica Karim, We Olive, LLC, and absent putative class members, who were not bound by the dismissal or any settlement.
What happened
In Karim v. We Olive, LLC, the parties told the court they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or the agreement's terms.
The court cancelled all scheduled conferences and deadlines. It also directed the clerk to close the case, terminate open motions, and remove the class-action language from the caption. The parties could ask to reopen the case within 30 days by showing good cause. They could also ask the court to retain authority to enforce their agreement, but only if they submitted the agreement and a request within that same 30-day period.
Judge Valerie Caproni dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, including attorneys’ fees, to either party. Because the parties did not tell the court they intended to follow the required class-settlement procedure, the dismissal and any settlement applied only between Jessica Karim and We Olive, LLC and did not bind absent putative class members.
The detailed version
- Karim v. We Olive, LLC · No. 1:24-cv-00590
- Valerie Caproni
- June 3, 2024
Background
On May 31, 2024, the parties notified the court that they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues. The opinion does not state the underlying claims or provide the terms of the agreement.
Court’s Orders
The court cancelled all previously scheduled conferences and other deadlines. It ordered that the case be dismissed with prejudice and without costs, including attorneys’ fees, to either party. The clerk was directed to terminate all open motions and close the case.
The parties could apply to reopen the case within 30 days. Any such application had to show good cause for keeping the case open in light of the parties’ settlement. The order states that a request filed after 30 days, or without a showing of good cause, could be denied on that basis alone.
The parties could also ask the court to retain jurisdiction—meaning continuing authority—to enforce their settlement agreement. To do so, they had to submit the agreement and a request for an order expressly retaining jurisdiction within the same 30-day period.
Class-Action Effect
The court directed the clerk to remove the words “individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated” from Jessica Karim’s name in the caption. Because the parties had not notified the court that they intended to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e), the dismissal and any settlement were operative only between Karim and We Olive, LLC. They did not bind absent putative class members.
Disposition
The court dismissed the case with prejudice, without costs to either party, and closed the case. This order resolved the matter based on the parties’ reported agreement rather than deciding the merits of the underlying claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.