Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 18, 2025

The Charter Oak Fire Insurance Company v. Pennsylvania Lumbermens Mutual…

Full caption

The Charter Oak Fire Insurance Company v. Pennsylvania Lumbermens Mutual Insurance Company

Judge
Vyskocil
Docket
1:24-cv-04644
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureSummary Judgment
In one sentence

In Charter Oak v. Pennsylvania Lumbermens, Judge Vyskocil discontinued the settled case, subject to restoration, and denied summary judgment as moot.

Who this affects

The Charter Oak Fire Insurance Company and Pennsylvania Lumbermens Mutual Insurance Company, the parties to the discontinued case.

What happened

The Charter Oak Fire Insurance Company sued Pennsylvania Lumbermens Mutual Insurance Company in federal court. The parties told the court they had reached a settlement in principle.

The court discontinued the case 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 October 17, 2025. If no application was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice. The court also denied the pending summary-judgment motion as moot and postponed all other deadlines without setting new dates.

Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil ordered the clerk to terminate the relevant docket entries and close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
The Charter Oak Fire Insurance Company v. Pennsylvania Lumbermens Mutual… · No. 1:24-cv-04644
Judge
Vyskocil
Date
Aug. 18, 2025

Background

The parties informed the court that they had reached a settlement in principle. The opinion does not describe the underlying dispute or the settlement’s terms.

Rulings

The court ordered that the action be discontinued without costs to either party. The action could be restored to the court’s calendar if the parties were unable to put their settlement in writing and an application to restore the case was made by October 17, 2025. If no such application was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice, meaning the action could not be revived through that restoration procedure.

The court also denied as moot the pending motion for summary judgment at docket entry 32. A motion is moot when the court no longer needs to decide it because circumstances have made the issue unnecessary. All other dates and deadlines were adjourned without a new date.

Case Status

The clerk was directed to terminate docket entries 32 and 41 and close the case. The order did not decide the merits of the underlying dispute; it resolved the action based on the parties’ settlement in principle and the stated restoration conditions.

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.