Martinez v. Cuomo
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:20-cv-03338
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Martinez v. Cuomo, Judge Caproni dismissed the settled case with prejudice and without costs, while allowing a 30-day reopening request.
The plaintiffs and Andrew Cuomo were affected by the dismissal. The order ended the case based on the parties’ settlement, subject to the stated 30-day procedures for seeking reopening or asking the court to retain jurisdiction to enforce the settlement.
What happened
In Martinez v. Cuomo, the parties reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues during a settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Parker. The court canceled all previously scheduled conferences and deadlines.
The court dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, including attorneys’ fees, to either party. It also directed the Clerk of Court to terminate open motions and close the case.
Judge Caproni allowed the parties to apply within 30 days to reopen the case if they showed good cause. The parties could also ask the court to retain jurisdiction to enforce their settlement agreement by submitting the agreement and a specific request within that period.
The detailed version
- Martinez v. Cuomo · No. 1:20-cv-03338
- Valerie Caproni
- June 1, 2020
Background
Dennis Martinez, Douglas Nguyen, James Hallenbeck, Jill Wildberger, and Disability Rights New York sued Andrew Cuomo in his official capacity as Governor of New York State. The opinion states that the parties reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues during a May 19, 2020 settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Parker.
Ruling
The court ordered that all previously scheduled conferences and other deadlines be canceled. 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 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 in light of the settlement; a late application or one without a showing of good cause could be denied solely on that basis. The court also stated that, if the parties wanted the court to retain jurisdiction—meaning authority to enforce the settlement agreement—they had to submit the 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.