Wirth v. Domerson
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:22-cv-10809
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Wirth v. Domerson, Judge Caproni dismissed the settled case with prejudice and without costs after mediation.
Robert C. Wirth and Leones H. Domerson, the parties to the settled case; the order also affects any request they make within 30 days to reopen the case or have the court retain authority to enforce the settlement.
What happened
In Wirth v. Domerson, the court was told that mediation had produced an agreement resolving all issues. The order therefore canceled the remaining conferences and deadlines.
The court dismissed the case with prejudice and ordered that neither party pay costs or attorneys’ fees. It also directed the Clerk of Court to close the case and terminate all open motions.
Judge Valerie Caproni allowed the parties 30 days to request reopening for good cause. During that period, they may also ask the court to keep authority to enforce their settlement by submitting the agreement and a separate request.
The detailed version
- Wirth v. Domerson · No. 1:22-cv-10809
- Valerie Caproni
- Feb. 25, 2025
Background
The court was notified on February 24, 2025, that the parties had reached an agreement through mediation on all issues.
Order
The court canceled all previously scheduled conferences and other deadlines. It dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, including attorneys’ fees, to either party. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate all open motions and close the case.
The order permits the parties to apply to reopen the case within 30 days. Any such application must show good cause for keeping the case open despite the settlement. A request filed after 30 days, or without a showing of good cause, may be denied on that basis alone.
The parties may also ask the court to retain authority to enforce their settlement agreement. To do so, they must, within the same 30-day period, submit the settlement agreement under Rule 7.A of the court’s Individual Practices and request an order expressly retaining that authority.
Effect
The court ended the case based on the reported settlement. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or the settlement’s terms.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.