Thorne v. Wahl Clipper Corporation
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:24-cv-02288
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Thorne v. Wahl Clipper, Judge Caproni dismissed the settled case with prejudice without costs and said absent class members were not bound.
Braulio Thorne and Wahl Clipper Corporation were directly affected by the dismissal and settlement. Absent putative class members were not bound by the dismissal or any settlement.
What happened
In Thorne v. Wahl Clipper Corporation, the parties told the court they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues.
The court canceled all scheduled conferences and deadlines. It also directed the clerk to remove the class-related language from the caption.
Judge Valerie Caproni dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs or attorneys’ fees to either party. The dismissal and any settlement applied only between Braulio Thorne and Wahl Clipper Corporation; it did not bind absent putative class members. The parties could ask to reopen the case within 30 days for good cause and could ask the court to retain authority to enforce their settlement by submitting the agreement and a request within that period.
The detailed version
- Thorne v. Wahl Clipper Corporation · No. 1:24-cv-02288
- Valerie Caproni
- June 26, 2024
Background
Braulio Thorne filed the case on behalf of himself and other similarly situated people against Wahl Clipper Corporation. On June 25, 2024, the parties notified the court that they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues.
Court’s ruling
The court canceled all previously scheduled conferences and other deadlines. It dismissed the case 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 court permitted the parties to apply to reopen the case within 30 days. Such an application had to show good cause for keeping the case open in light of the settlement. The court also stated that, if the parties wanted it to retain authority to enforce the settlement, they had to submit the settlement agreement and a request for retained authority within the same 30-day period.
The court directed the clerk to remove the language stating that Thorne sued individually and on behalf of others similarly situated from the caption. Because the parties had not told the court that they intended to follow the federal class-settlement procedure in Rule 23(e), the dismissal and any settlement operated only between Thorne and Wahl Clipper Corporation. They did not bind absent putative class members.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.