Girotto v. Barton Perreira Retail VI, LLC
- Vyskocil
- 1:24-cv-09085
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
Girotto v. Barton Perreira, Judge Vyskocil discontinued the settled case, allowing restoration by March 10, 2025, with prejudice otherwise.
Luigi Girotto, Barton Perreira Retail VI, LLC, and Robinson Callen, Trustee; the action was discontinued following the parties’ stated settlement in principle.
What happened
In Girotto v. Barton Perreira Retail VI, LLC, the parties informed the court that they had reached a settlement in principle. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or settlement terms.
The court discontinued the action without costs to any party. It allowed the case to be restored to the court’s calendar if the parties could not put their settlement in writing and an application to restore was made by March 10, 2025.
Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil also stated that the dismissal would be with prejudice under the order’s stated condition. The relevant sentence in the opinion text is incomplete, so the precise wording of that condition is unclear.
The detailed version
- Girotto v. Barton Perreira Retail VI, LLC · No. 1:24-cv-09085
- Vyskocil
- Feb. 10, 2025
Background
The parties sent the court a letter stating that they had reached a settlement in principle. The opinion does not provide the claims, defenses, or terms of the proposed settlement.
Ruling
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 March 10, 2025.
The opinion then states that the dismissal would be with prejudice under the condition described in the order. However, the relevant sentence appears incomplete in the provided text, making the precise condition unclear. The court cited Muze, Inc. v. Digital On Demand, Inc., 356 F.3d 492, 494 n.1 (2d Cir. 2004), and signed the order on February 10, 2025.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.