Picon v. SA Hospitality Group, LLC
- Vyskocil
- 1:25-cv-01574
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Picon v. SA Hospitality Group, Judge Vyskocil discontinued the action after settlement in principle, allowing restoration by May 30 or dismissal with prejudice.
Yelitza Picon, the putative similarly situated plaintiffs, and SA Hospitality Group, LLC; the action could be restored by May 30, 2025, under the order’s stated conditions, but otherwise the dismissal would be with prejudice.
What happened
In Picon v. SA Hospitality Group, the parties told the court that they had reached a settlement in principle. The case was brought by Yelitza Picon on behalf of herself and others similarly situated against SA Hospitality Group, LLC.
The court discontinued the action without costs to any party. It allowed the parties to ask to restore the case to the court’s calendar if they could not put their settlement in writing, but that request had to be made by May 30, 2025.
Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil ordered that if no restoration request was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice. The court also adjourned all other dates and deadlines indefinitely and directed the Clerk to terminate the letter motion at ECF No. 8.
The detailed version
- Picon v. SA Hospitality Group, LLC · No. 1:25-cv-01574
- Vyskocil
- Apr. 14, 2025
Background
Yelitza Picon brought the action on behalf of herself and others similarly situated against SA Hospitality Group, LLC. The parties sent the court a letter stating that they had reached a settlement in principle. The opinion does not describe the claims or the settlement’s terms.
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. Restoration was permitted only if the parties were unable to memorialize their settlement in writing and the request to restore the case was made by May 30, 2025. If no such request was made by that date, the court stated that the dismissal would be with prejudice. A dismissal with prejudice generally bars the same action from being brought again, while the court’s order specifically allowed restoration before the deadline under the stated conditions.
The court adjourned all other dates and deadlines indefinitely. It also directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the letter motion at ECF No. 8. Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil signed the order on April 14, 2025.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.