Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 17, 2025

Young v. Colgate-Palmolive Company

Judge
Vyskocil
Docket
1:25-cv-01238
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Young v. Colgate-Palmolive Company, Judge Vyskocil discontinued the action after settlement in principle, allowing restoration by May 19, 2025.

Who this affects

LesHawn Young, the proposed class, and Colgate-Palmolive Company were affected by the discontinuance and settlement-related restoration deadline.

What happened

In Young v. Colgate-Palmolive Company, the parties informed the court that they had reached a settlement in principle.

The court discontinued the action without costs and without prejudice to restoring it if the parties could not put their settlement in writing and applied to restore the case by May 19, 2025.

Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil stated that if no restoration application was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice. The court also postponed all other dates and deadlines indefinitely and directed the Clerk to terminate the parties’ letter motion.

The detailed version

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

Case
Young v. Colgate-Palmolive Company · No. 1:25-cv-01238
Judge
Vyskocil
Date
Apr. 17, 2025

Background The parties informed the court by letter that they had reached a settlement in principle.

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 could not memorialize their settlement in writing. Any application to restore the action had to be made by May 19, 2025. The court stated that if no application was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice. All other dates and deadlines were postponed indefinitely.

Additional Order Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the letter motion filed at ECF No. 9.

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.