Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 2, 2025

Sumlin v. CSB Local, LLC

Judge
Vyskocil
Docket
1:24-cv-09993
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureClass Action
In one sentence

In Sumlin v. CSB Local, LLC, Judge Vyskocil discontinued the action after a settlement in principle, allowing restoration by July 2, 2025, or dismissal with prejudice.

Who this affects

Dennis Sumlin and CSB Local, LLC. The action was discontinued based on the parties’ reported settlement in principle, subject to a possible restoration request by July 2, 2025; otherwise, the dismissal would be with prejudice.

What happened

In Sumlin v. CSB Local, LLC, Dennis Sumlin told the court that the parties had reached a settlement in principle. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or the settlement terms.

The court discontinued the action without costs to either party. The case could be restored to the court’s calendar if the parties could not put their settlement in writing, but an application to restore had to be made by July 2, 2025.

Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil ordered that if no timely restoration request was made, the dismissal would be with prejudice, meaning the action could not be restored under that order.

The detailed version

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

Case
Sumlin v. CSB Local, LLC · No. 1:24-cv-09993
Judge
Vyskocil
Date
June 2, 2025

Background

Plaintiff Dennis Sumlin filed a letter informing the court that the parties had reached a settlement in principle. The opinion does not state the claims’ substance or the proposed settlement’s terms.

Court’s Action

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 were unable to memorialize their settlement in writing. Any application to restore the action had to be made by July 2, 2025.

Effect of the Order

The order provided that if no application to restore the action was made by July 2, 2025, the dismissal would be with prejudice. The opinion resolved the case based on the parties’ reported settlement in principle and did not decide the underlying claims.

Judge

Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil issued the order on June 2, 2025.

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.