Bellomo-Venturi v. Oasis Luxe Management & Co, Inc.
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:19-cv-07329
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Bellomo-Venturi v. Oasis Luxe, Judge Caproni dismissed the settled case with prejudice, canceled deadlines, and closed the case.
Susan Bellomo-Venturi and the defendants—Oasis Luxe Management & Co Inc., Sevda Imranova, and Oasis Lux Management Co Inc 401(K) Profit Sharing Plan Trust—are affected because the case was dismissed with prejudice and closed after the parties reported an agreement in principle.
What happened
In Bellomo-Venturi v. Oasis Luxe Management & Co., Inc., the parties told the court they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues.
The court canceled all scheduled conferences and deadlines, dismissed the case with prejudice without costs or attorneys’ fees to either party, terminated pending motions, and closed the case. The parties could ask to reopen the case within 30 days if they showed good cause. They could also ask the court to keep authority to enforce their settlement by filing the settlement agreement and a request within that same period.
Judge Valerie Caproni entered the order on November 13, 2019.
The detailed version
- Bellomo-Venturi v. Oasis Luxe Management & Co, Inc. · No. 1:19-cv-07329
- Valerie Caproni
- Nov. 13, 2019
Background
On November 12, 2019, the parties notified the court that they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues. The order does not describe the settlement’s terms.
Ruling
The court ordered that all previously scheduled conferences and other deadlines be canceled. It dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, including attorneys’ fees, to either party. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate all open motions and close the case.
The order allowed the parties to apply to reopen the case within 30 days. Such an application had to show good cause for keeping the case open despite the settlement, and an application filed after 30 days or without a showing of good cause could be denied on that basis alone.
The order also stated that, if the parties wanted the court to retain jurisdiction—the court’s authority—to enforce the settlement agreement, they had to submit the settlement agreement and request an order expressly retaining jurisdiction within the same 30-day period.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.