Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 21, 2025

Mojica v. Business Management Consultants Inc.

Judge
Vyskocil
Docket
1:24-cv-04829
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

Mojica v. Business Management Consultants Inc.: Judge Vyskocil discontinued the action after a settlement in principle, subject to restoration by February 20, 2025.

Who this affects

Reyes Mojica, Business Management Consultants Inc., and John Doe. The action was discontinued without costs, with an opportunity to seek restoration by February 20, 2025 if the settlement was not put in writing; otherwise, the dismissal would be with prejudice.

What happened

In Mojica v. Business Management Consultants Inc., the parties informed the court that they had reached a settlement in principle. The defendants listed in the order are Business Management Consultants Inc. and John Doe.

The court discontinued the action without costs to any party and allowed either side to seek restoration to the court’s calendar if the parties could not put their settlement in writing. Any application to restore the action had to be made by February 20, 2025.

Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil ordered that, if no restoration application was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice. The order did not decide the underlying claims.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Mojica v. Business Management Consultants Inc. · No. 1:24-cv-04829
Judge
Vyskocil
Date
Jan. 21, 2025

Background

The parties informed the court that they had reached a settlement in principle. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or provide the settlement’s terms.

Court’s action

The court ordered that the action be discontinued without costs to any party. The discontinuance was without prejudice to restoring the action to the court’s calendar if the parties were unable to memorialize their settlement in writing. Any application to restore the action had to be made by February 20, 2025.

Effect of the order

The court further ordered that, if no application to restore the action was made by February 20, 2025, the dismissal would be with prejudice. The order resolved the case based on the parties’ reported settlement process and did not decide the merits of the underlying claims. Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil signed the order on January 21, 2025.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.