Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 10, 2020

Hawley v. Mphasis Corporation

Judge
Denise Cote
Docket
1:12-cv-00592
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Hawley v. Mphasis Corporation, Judge Cote discontinued the action without costs, allowing restoration by May 20, 2020, otherwise dismissal would be with prejudice.

Who this affects

Curt Hawley and Mphasis Corporation; the action could be restored only if an application was made by May 20, 2020.

What happened

In Hawley v. Mphasis Corporation, the plaintiff’s lawyer asked for 30 more days to submit an agreement ending the case or reopen it. The request was made on April 10, 2020.

Mphasis Corporation agreed to the extension. The court discontinued the action without costs to either party and allowed an application to restore the case by May 20, 2020.

Judge Cote ordered that no further extensions would be granted. If no application to restore the case was made by May 20, the dismissal would be with prejudice.

The detailed version

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

Case
Hawley v. Mphasis Corporation · No. 1:12-cv-00592
Judge
Denise Cote
Date
Apr. 10, 2020

Background

Counsel for Curt Hawley asked the court for an additional 30 days to submit a stipulation of dismissal or reopen the action. Mphasis Corporation consented to the requested extension.

Ruling

Judge Denise Cote ordered that the action be discontinued without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring it to the court’s calendar, provided that an application to restore the action was made by May 20, 2020. The court further ordered that no additional extensions of that date would be granted. If no application to restore the action was made by May 20, the dismissal would be with prejudice.

What the Opinion Does Not Decide

The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or decide 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.