Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled May 29, 2020

Guglielmo v. Sidelineswap, Inc.

Judge
Valerie Caproni
Docket
1:20-cv-00608
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureContract
In one sentence

In Guglielmo v. Sidelineswap, Judge Caproni dismissed the settled case with prejudice, without costs, and closed it.

Who this affects

Joseph Guglielmo and Sidelineswap, Inc.; the case was closed, with no costs or attorneys’ fees awarded to either party, subject to the stated 30-day procedures for reopening the case or requesting continued authority to enforce the settlement.

What happened

Guglielmo v. Sidelineswap, Inc. involved Joseph Guglielmo and SidelineSwap, Inc.; the parties told the court they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues.

The court canceled scheduled conferences and deadlines, terminated open motions, and closed the case. The parties could ask to reopen it within 30 days by showing good cause. They could also ask the court to keep power to enforce their settlement by submitting the agreement and a proper request within that same period.

Judge Valerie Caproni dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, including attorneys’ fees, to either party.

The detailed version

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

Case
Guglielmo v. Sidelineswap, Inc. · No. 1:20-cv-00608
Judge
Valerie Caproni
Date
May 29, 2020

Background

On May 28, 2020, the parties notified the court that they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues. The opinion does not describe the agreement’s terms or the underlying claims.

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

Within 30 days, the parties could apply to reopen the case. The application had to show good cause for keeping the case open in light of the settlement. A request filed after 30 days or without a showing of good cause could be denied solely on that basis.

If the parties wanted the court to retain jurisdiction—meaning continuing authority—to enforce their settlement agreement, they had to submit the agreement to the court and request an order expressly retaining that authority within the same 30-day period.

Disposition

Judge Valerie Caproni dismissed the case with prejudice, without costs to either party, and directed that the case be closed.

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.