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

Espinal v. Splintek Inc.

Full caption

Frangie Espinal, on behalf of herself and all other persons similarly situated v. Splintek Inc.

Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Docket
1:25-cv-02203
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureClass Action
In one sentence

In Espinal v. Splintek, Judge Abrams discontinued the settled case without costs, allowing restoration within 45 days.

Who this affects

The parties to Frangie Espinal’s settled action against Splintek Inc.; the case was closed, subject to a 45-day period for seeking restoration.

What happened

Frangie Espinal brought this case against Splintek Inc. on behalf of herself and other similarly situated people. The court was informed that the case had settled, but the order does not describe the claims or settlement terms.

The court discontinued the action without costs to either party. The order allows a party to ask to restore the case to the court’s docket within 45 days; later requests may be denied solely because they were late.

Judge Ronnie Abrams also said that any request for the court to retain authority to enforce the settlement must place the settlement terms on the public record and receive the court’s approval within the same 45-day period. The clerk was directed to close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Espinal v. Splintek Inc. · No. 1:25-cv-02203
Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Date
Sept. 18, 2025

Background

The court stated that it had been informed that this case had settled. The order does not identify the claims, describe the settlement, or state whether the court approved any settlement 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 docket if an application to restore it is made within 45 days. The order states that an application to reopen filed after that period may be denied solely because it was filed late.

The court further stated that, if the parties want the court to retain jurisdiction—that is, continuing authority—to enforce a settlement agreement, the agreement’s terms must be placed on the public record and approved by the court within the same 45-day period. The clerk was directed to close the case.

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.