Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 18, 2025

United Specialty Insurance Company v. Ohio Security Insurance Company

Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Docket
1:24-cv-04950
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureContract
In one sentence

In United Specialty v. Ohio Security, Judge Abrams discontinued the case after a reported settlement in principle, allowing restoration within 60 days.

Who this affects

United Specialty Insurance Company and Ohio Security Insurance Company, whose action was discontinued and whose opportunity to restore the case or seek enforcement jurisdiction was limited to the stated 60-day period.

What happened

United Specialty Insurance Company sued Ohio Security Insurance Company in the Southern District of New York. The court was told that the case had been settled in principle.

The court discontinued the action without costs to either party and without prejudice to restoring it to the court’s docket within 60 days. The court directed the Clerk of Court to close the case.

Judge Ronnie Abrams also said that any request for the court to retain authority to enforce a settlement had to place the settlement terms on the public record and receive the court’s approval within the same 60-day period. The order did not decide the underlying dispute.

The detailed version

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

Case
United Specialty Insurance Company v. Ohio Security Insurance Company · No. 1:24-cv-04950
Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Date
Feb. 18, 2025

Background

The court stated that it had been informed that United Specialty Insurance Company’s action against Ohio Security Insurance Company had been settled in principle. The opinion does not describe the claims or the 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 docket if an application to restore it was made within 60 days. It stated that an application filed after that period could be denied solely because it was late. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case.

The court also stated that, if the parties wanted it to retain jurisdiction—meaning authority to enforce the settlement agreement—the settlement’s terms had to be placed on the public record and approved by the court within the same 60-day period. The order did not resolve the merits of the parties’ dispute.

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.