Dervisevic v. Wolfgangs Steakhouse, Inc.
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:19-cv-00814
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Dervisevic v. Wolfgang’s Steakhouse, Judge Caproni dismissed the settled case with prejudice and closed it.
The dismissal affects Naser Dervisevic and the named defendants. The case was closed with prejudice and without costs, including attorneys’ fees, to either party, subject to the order’s 30-day provisions for seeking reopening or asking the court to retain authority to enforce the settlement.
What happened
Dervisevic v. Wolfgang’s Steakhouse, Inc. involved Naser Dervisevic’s claims against the restaurant and the other named defendants on behalf of himself and similarly situated people.
The parties told the court they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues. The court canceled scheduled conferences and deadlines and terminated the pending motions.
Judge Valerie Caproni dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, including attorneys’ fees, to either side, and directed the Clerk to close it. The parties could ask to reopen the case within 30 days by showing good cause; they could also ask the court to retain authority to enforce their settlement by submitting the agreement and a separate request within that period.
The detailed version
- Dervisevic v. Wolfgangs Steakhouse, Inc. · No. 1:19-cv-00814
- Valerie Caproni
- Feb. 21, 2020
Background
Naser Dervisevic brought the case on behalf of himself and others similarly situated against Wolfgang’s Steakhouse, Inc., Wolfgang Zwiener, Rexferatovic, Zijo Music, Peter Zwiener, and Steven Zwiener. The opinion states that, on February 20, 2020, the parties notified the court that they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues. The opinion does not provide the settlement’s terms.
Court’s Action
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 of Court was directed to terminate all open motions and close the case.
Reopening and Settlement Enforcement
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 a request filed after 30 days or without a showing of good cause could be denied solely 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
This is a procedural order because the court dismissed the case based on the parties’ settlement rather than deciding the underlying claims. Judge Valerie Caproni entered the order on February 21, 2020.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.