Jackson v. 22 St Marks Bake LLC
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:24-cv-08794
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Jackson v. 22 St Marks Bake, Judge Caproni dismissed the case with prejudice after the parties reported settling all issues.
Malik Jackson and defendants 22 St Marks Bake LLC d/b/a Bake Culture and Park 80 Holding LLC. The case is closed, subject to any timely application to reopen for good cause or request for the court to retain jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement.
What happened
In Jackson v. 22 St Marks Bake LLC, the parties told the court that they had reached an agreement resolving all issues.
The court canceled scheduled conferences and deadlines, dismissed the case with prejudice without costs or attorneys’ fees to either party, terminated pending motions, and closed the case.
Judge Valerie Caproni allowed the parties 30 days to seek reopening for good cause or to ask the court to retain authority to enforce their settlement agreement.
The detailed version
- Jackson v. 22 St Marks Bake LLC · No. 1:24-cv-08794
- Valerie Caproni
- Mar. 28, 2025
Background
On March 27, 2025, the parties informed the court that they had reached an agreement on all issues. The order refers to the parties’ settlement but does not describe its terms.
Court’s action
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.
Possible reopening and enforcement
Within 30 days, the parties may apply to reopen the case. The application must show good cause for keeping the case open in light of the settlement and must be filed within that 30-day period. The order states that a late request or one without a showing of good cause may be denied solely on that basis.
If the parties want the court to retain jurisdiction—that is, authority to enforce the settlement agreement—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 jurisdiction. The order does not state whether the parties made either submission.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.