Thorne v. Sol And Selene, Inc.
- Ronnie Abrams
- 1:24-cv-04033
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Thorne v. Sol And Selene, Judge Abrams discontinued the settled-in-principle case without costs, allowing restoration within 45 days.
Braulio Thorne, the proposed class members, and Sol And Selene, Inc. are affected by the case’s discontinuance and the 45-day deadline for seeking restoration or asking the Court to retain authority to enforce a settlement.
What happened
In Thorne v. Sol And Selene, Inc., Braulio Thorne brought an action on behalf of herself and others similarly situated against Sol And Selene, Inc. The court was told that the case had been settled in principle.
The court discontinued the case without costs to any party. The parties could ask to restore the case within 45 days of the order; later applications could be denied solely because they were late. The court also explained that any request for it to retain power to enforce a settlement would require the settlement terms to be placed on the public record and approved by the court within that period.
Judge Ronnie Abrams directed the Clerk of Court to close the case. The order did not describe the settlement terms or decide the underlying claims.
The detailed version
- Thorne v. Sol And Selene, Inc. · No. 1:24-cv-04033
- Ronnie Abrams
- Sept. 10, 2024
Background
Braulio Thorne sued Sol And Selene, Inc., on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated. The opinion states that the Court was told the case had been settled in principle. It does not provide the settlement terms or state whether a final settlement approval had occurred.
Order
The Court ordered that the action be discontinued without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring the action to the Court’s docket if an application to restore it was made within 45 days. It stated that an application to reopen filed after that period could be denied solely because it was late.
The Court further stated that, if the parties wanted the Court to retain jurisdiction—that is, continuing authority—to enforce a settlement agreement, the agreement’s terms had to be placed on the public record and approved by the Court within the same 45-day period. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case.
Classification
This is a procedural order because the Court discontinued the action based on a settlement reported to be in principle and did not decide the underlying claims. Judge Ronnie Abrams signed the order on September 10, 2024.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.