Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 17, 2020

Rivas v. CTown Supermarket

Judge
Valerie Caproni
Docket
1:19-cv-06279
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureContract
In one sentence

In Rivas v. C Town Supermarket, Judge Caproni dismissed the settled case with prejudice and without costs, while allowing limited reopening requests.

Who this affects

Denis Rivas and the defendants, C Town Supermarket, Jose Beltre, and Juan Marte. The case was dismissed with prejudice and without costs, including attorneys’ fees, but the parties could seek reopening within 30 days by showing good cause and could request that the court retain authority to enforce their settlement.

What happened

In Rivas v. C Town Supermarket, 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 and without costs, including attorneys’ fees, and directed the clerk to close the case.

Judge Caproni allowed the parties to seek reopening within 30 days if they showed good cause, and said they could request continued court authority to enforce their settlement by filing the agreement and a separate request within that period.

The detailed version

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

Case
Rivas v. CTown Supermarket · No. 1:19-cv-06279
Judge
Valerie Caproni
Date
Jan. 17, 2020

Background

On January 15, 2020, the parties notified the court that they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues.

Court’s 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.

Reopening and Settlement Enforcement

Within 30 days, the parties could apply to reopen the case. The application had to show good cause for keeping the case open in light of the settlement, and a late application or one without a showing of good cause could be denied on that basis. If the parties wanted the court to retain jurisdiction—continuing authority—to enforce the settlement agreement, they had to file the agreement and request an order expressly retaining jurisdiction within the same 30-day period.

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.