Mendez v. Salon 94 Design LLC
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:19-cv-11511
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Mendez v. Salon 94 Design LLC, Judge Caproni dismissed the settled case with prejudice and without costs.
Himelda Mendez, the people she sought to represent, and Salon 94 Design LLC and Salon 94 LLC were affected because the case was dismissed with prejudice, without costs, and closed after the parties reported an agreement in principle.
What happened
Mendez v. Salon 94 Design LLC was brought by Himelda Mendez for herself and others in similar situations against Salon 94 Design LLC and Salon 94 LLC. 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 to either side, terminated all open motions, and closed the case.
Judge Valerie Caproni issued the order. The parties could ask to reopen the case within 30 days by showing good cause, and they could ask the court to retain authority to enforce their settlement by submitting the agreement and a jurisdiction request within that period.
The detailed version
- Mendez v. Salon 94 Design LLC · No. 1:19-cv-11511
- Valerie Caproni
- Mar. 3, 2020
Background
Himelda Mendez sued Salon 94 Design LLC and Salon 94 LLC for herself and on behalf of other similarly situated people. The opinion states that, on March 3, 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 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. Any such application had to show good cause for keeping the case open despite the settlement. The court stated that a request filed after 30 days or without a showing of good cause could be denied on that basis alone.
The parties could also ask the court to retain jurisdiction—that is, continuing authority—to enforce their settlement agreement. To do so, 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.