V.P. v. City School District of the City of New York
- Vyskocil
- 1:24-cv-08513
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
V.P. v. City School District: Judge Vyskocil discontinued the action after a settlement in principle, allowing restoration by June 9, 2025.
V.P., L.D., and the City School District of the City of New York. The case was discontinued while the parties worked to put their settlement in writing, subject to the June 9, 2025 restoration deadline.
What happened
In V.P. v. City School District of the City of New York, the defendant informed the court that the parties had reached a settlement in principle.
The court discontinued the case without costs to either party. The case could be restored if the parties could not put their settlement in writing and applied to restore it by June 9, 2025.
Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil ordered that, if no restoration application was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice, meaning the action could not be reopened. All other dates and deadlines were postponed indefinitely.
The detailed version
- V.P. v. City School District of the City of New York · No. 1:24-cv-08513
- Vyskocil
- May 9, 2025
Background
V.P., individually and on behalf of L.D., a minor, sued the City School District of the City of New York, doing business as the New York City Department of Education. The opinion states that the defendant informed the court that the parties had reached a settlement in principle.
Court’s Action
The court ordered that the action be discontinued without costs to any party. The discontinuance was without prejudice to restoring the action to the court’s calendar if the parties were unable to memorialize their settlement in writing, provided that an application to restore the action was made by June 9, 2025.
The court further ordered that, if no application to restore the action was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice. The court also adjourned all other dates and deadlines indefinitely. Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil entered the order.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.