Baptiste v. Tapestry, Inc.
- Ronnie Abrams
- 1:18-cv-10729
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Baptiste v. Tapestry, Inc., Judge Abrams discontinued the settled case without costs, allowing restoration within 30 days.
Monica Jean Baptiste and Tapestry, Inc., whose settled case was discontinued and whose ability to restore it or seek court enforcement of the settlement was subject to the stated 30-day deadline.
What happened
Baptiste v. Tapestry, Inc. was reported to the court as settled. The opinion does not describe the settlement’s terms or the underlying dispute.
The court discontinued the action without costs to either party. It allowed a party to ask to restore the case to the court’s docket within 30 days, and directed the Clerk of Court to close the case.
Judge Ronnie Abrams also stated that any request for the court to retain authority to enforce the settlement had to place the settlement terms on the public record and receive the court’s approval within the same 30-day period.
The detailed version
- Baptiste v. Tapestry, Inc. · No. 1:18-cv-10729
- Ronnie Abrams
- Mar. 9, 2020
Background
The court stated that it had been informed that the case had been settled. The opinion does not provide the settlement terms or address the underlying claims.
Order
The court 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 it was made within 30 days. It stated that an application to reopen filed after that period could be denied solely because it was late. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case.
The court further stated that, if the parties wanted the court to retain jurisdiction—meaning authority—to enforce the settlement agreement, the agreement’s terms had to be placed on the public record and approved by the court within the same 30-day period.
Disposition
Judge Ronnie Abrams discontinued the action under these terms. The order did not decide the merits of the parties’ underlying dispute.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.