Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 8, 2020

Reineck v. Montefiore Medical Center

Judge
Valerie Caproni
Docket
1:19-cv-05470
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureContract
In one sentence

In Reineck v. Montefiore Medical Center, Judge Caproni dismissed the settled case with prejudice and without costs, while permitting 30-day reopening requests.

Who this affects

Christopher Reineck, Montefiore Medical Center, and Jack D. Weiler Hospital of the Albert Einstein College of Medicine; the order also governed any request by the parties to reopen the case or have the court retain authority to enforce their settlement.

What happened

In Reineck v. Montefiore Medical Center, the court was told that the parties had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues.

The court canceled all scheduled conferences and other deadlines after receiving that notification. The opinion does not describe the settlement’s terms.

Judge Valerie Caproni dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, including attorneys’ fees, terminated all open motions, and closed the case. The parties could apply within 30 days to reopen it for good cause; they could also ask the court to retain authority to enforce their settlement by submitting the agreement and a specific request within that period.

The detailed version

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

Case
Reineck v. Montefiore Medical Center · No. 1:19-cv-05470
Judge
Valerie Caproni
Date
Jan. 8, 2020

Background

On January 7, 2020, the court received notice from Magistrate Judge Aaron that the parties had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues. The opinion does not state the settlement’s terms.

Order

The court canceled all previously scheduled conferences and other deadlines. It dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, including attorneys’ fees, to either party. The Clerk 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 in light of the settlement, and an untimely application or one without a showing of good cause could be denied on that basis. The order also stated that, if the parties wanted the court to retain jurisdiction—meaning authority—to enforce the settlement agreement, they had to submit the agreement and request an order expressly retaining that authority within the same 30-day period.

Disposition

Judge Valerie Caproni dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, terminated the open motions, and closed the case. The order did not decide the underlying claims on their merits.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.