United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. M/V Maersk Brooklyn
- Ronnie Abrams
- 1:19-cv-08191
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In United India Insurance v. Maersk Line, Judge Abrams discontinued the case after the parties reported a settlement in principle, allowing restoration within 30 days.
United India Insurance Co. Ltd., BMR Industries Private Limited, Maersk Line A/S, and M/V Maersk Brooklyn; the case was closed, subject to a request to restore it within 30 days.
What happened
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and BMR Industries Private Limited sued Maersk Line A/S and M/V Maersk Brooklyn. The court was told that the parties had reached a settlement in principle.
The court discontinued the case without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring it within 30 days. The clerk was directed to close the case.
Judge Abrams also stated that any request to reopen filed after 30 days could be denied on that basis. To have the court retain authority to enforce a settlement, the parties had to place the settlement terms on the public record and obtain the court’s approval within that period.
The detailed version
- United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. M/V Maersk Brooklyn · No. 1:19-cv-08191
- Ronnie Abrams
- Nov. 14, 2019
Background United India Insurance Co. Ltd., acting as subrogor of BMR Industries Private Limited, and BMR Industries Private Limited were the plaintiffs. They sued Maersk Line A/S and M/V Maersk Brooklyn, including the vessel and its related equipment. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or the settlement’s terms.
What the Court Decided The court was informed that the parties had reached a settlement in principle. It 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 was made within 30 days.
The court further stated that any application to reopen filed after 30 days could be denied solely because it was filed late. If the parties wanted the court to retain jurisdiction—authority to enforce a settlement agreement—the settlement terms had to be placed on the public record and approved by the court within the same 30-day period. The clerk was directed to close the case.
Effect of the Order The order ended the case based on the reported settlement in principle; it did not decide the underlying dispute. The opinion does not state whether the settlement was finally completed or provide its terms.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.