Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 11, 2020

Fortune v. TNR II, LLC

Judge
Valerie Caproni
Docket
1:20-cv-03362
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureContract
In one sentence

In Fortune v. TNR II, LLC, Judge Caproni dismissed the settled case with prejudice and without costs, while allowing a limited 30-day reopening request.

Who this affects

James Fortune and TNR II, LLC; the case was closed under the parties’ agreement in principle, subject to the stated 30-day procedures for reopening or requesting retained jurisdiction.

What happened

In Fortune v. TNR II, LLC, the parties notified the court that they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues. The court cancelled the scheduled conferences and other deadlines.

The court dismissed the case with prejudice and ordered that neither party would receive costs or attorneys’ fees. It also directed the clerk to terminate open motions and close the case.

Judge Valerie Caproni allowed the parties to seek reopening within 30 days if they showed good cause. The parties could also ask the court to retain jurisdiction to enforce their settlement by submitting the agreement and a proper request within that period.

The detailed version

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

Case
Fortune v. TNR II, LLC · No. 1:20-cv-03362
Judge
Valerie Caproni
Date
June 11, 2020

Background

The court stated that, on June 9, 2020, it was notified that the parties had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues.

Ruling

The court ordered that all previously scheduled conferences and other deadlines were cancelled. It dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, including attorneys’ fees, to either party. The clerk was directed to terminate all open motions and close the case.

Possible Reopening and Settlement Enforcement

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

The court also stated that, if the parties wanted it to retain jurisdiction—the power to oversee enforcement of the settlement—they had to submit the settlement agreement and request an order expressly retaining jurisdiction within the same 30-day period.

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.