Sturkey v. Smith, Jr.
- Ronnie Abrams
- 1:19-cv-01999
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Sturkey v. Smith, Jr., Judge Abrams discontinued the settled case without costs and allowed timely restoration.
The discontinued action brought by Tashika Sturkey and Jordan Sturkey against Joe Haskell Smith, Jr. and Wiz Trans LLC, including any request to restore the case or have the court enforce the settlement.
What happened
Sturkey v. Smith, Jr. involved Tashika Sturkey and Jordan Sturkey as plaintiffs and Joe Haskell Smith, Jr. and Wiz Trans LLC as defendants. The court was told that the case had been settled.
The court discontinued the case without costs to any party. The order allowed either party to ask to restore the case to the court’s docket within 30 days; later applications could be denied solely because they were late. The court also stated that any request for it to enforce the settlement would require placing the settlement terms on the public record and obtaining the court’s approval within that same period.
Judge Ronnie Abrams issued the order on July 22, 2020, and directed the Clerk of Court to close the case.
The detailed version
- Sturkey v. Smith, Jr. · No. 1:19-cv-01999
- Ronnie Abrams
- July 22, 2020
Background
The opinion states that the court was informed that the action had been settled. It does not describe the underlying claims or the terms of the settlement.
Ruling
The court ordered that the action be discontinued without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring it to the court’s docket if an application to restore was made within 30 days. The court warned that an application filed after that period could be denied solely because it was late.
The court further stated that, if the parties wanted the court to retain jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement, the settlement terms had to be placed on the public record and approved by the court within the same 30-day period. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case. Judge Ronnie Abrams did not decide the underlying claims in this order.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.