Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 24, 2025

Hilton Garden Inns Franchise LLC v. SC Joplin 32 LLC

Judge
Vyskocil
Docket
1:24-cv-09022
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureContract
In one sentence

In Hilton Garden Inns v. SC Joplin, Judge Vyskocil discontinued the settled action without prejudice to restoration by February 24, 2025, otherwise with prejudice.

Who this affects

Hilton Garden Inns Franchise LLC, SC Joplin 32 LLC, and Sam Chang. The action was discontinued without costs, with restoration available by February 24, 2025 if the settlement was not memorialized in writing; otherwise, the dismissal would be with prejudice.

What happened

Hilton Garden Inns Franchise LLC v. SC Joplin 32 LLC involved a letter from the defendants telling the court that the parties had reached a settlement in principle. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims.

The court discontinued the action without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring it if the parties could not put their settlement in writing. Any request to restore the action had to be made by February 24, 2025. If no request was made by then, the dismissal would be with prejudice.

Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil entered the order on January 24, 2025.

The detailed version

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

Case
Hilton Garden Inns Franchise LLC v. SC Joplin 32 LLC · No. 1:24-cv-09022
Judge
Vyskocil
Date
Jan. 24, 2025

Background

The court received a letter filed by Defendants SC Joplin 32 LLC and Sam Chang stating that the parties had reached a settlement in principle. The opinion does not state the claims or merits of the dispute.

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 calendar if the parties were unable to memorialize their settlement in writing. The order required any application to restore the action to be made by February 24, 2025. If no such application was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice.

Effect

The order ended the action based on the reported settlement in principle, while preserving a limited opportunity to restore it if the settlement was not put in writing by the deadline. The court did not decide the underlying dispute. The order was signed by United States District Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil.

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.