Martinka v. Planck, LLC
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:20-cv-00225
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Martinka v. Planck, LLC, Judge Valerie Caproni dismissed the settled case with prejudice and no costs, while allowing limited reopening requests.
Paul Martinka and Planck, LLC; the case was closed after the parties reached a settlement agreement in principle.
What happened
Martinka v. Planck, LLC ended after the court was told that the parties had reached a settlement agreement in principle resolving all issues. The order does not describe the claims or settlement terms.
The court canceled all scheduled conferences and deadlines. It dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, including attorneys’ fees, directed the Clerk to terminate open motions, and closed the case.
Judge Valerie Caproni allowed the parties 30 days to request reopening for good cause. During that period, they could also ask the court to retain jurisdiction to enforce their settlement by submitting the agreement and a separate request.
The detailed version
- Martinka v. Planck, LLC · No. 1:20-cv-00225
- Valerie Caproni
- Apr. 17, 2020
Background
The court was notified by Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn that Paul Martinka and Planck, LLC had reached a settlement agreement in principle resolving all issues. The order does not state the underlying claims or provide the settlement’s terms.
Court’s Orders
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.
The parties were given 30 days to apply to reopen the case. Such an application had to show good cause for keeping the case open in light of the settlement and had to be filed within that 30-day period. The order states that a late request or one without a showing of good cause could be denied on that basis alone.
The order also provided that, if the parties wanted the court to retain jurisdiction—that is, continuing 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
Judge Valerie Caproni dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, directed that it be closed, and allowed the parties to seek reopening or retention of jurisdiction only under the conditions stated in the order.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.