Primak v. Chai Lifeline, Inc.
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:18-cv-09340
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Primak v. Chai Lifeline, Judge Caproni dismissed the settled case with prejudice, without costs, and closed it, while allowing limited reopening requests.
Azriel Primak and Chai Lifeline, Inc., also identified as Congregation Chai Lifeline; the case was closed after the parties reported an agreement in principle.
What happened
Primak v. Chai Lifeline, Inc. involved an agreement in principle between Azriel Primak and Chai Lifeline, Inc. resolving all issues.
The parties notified the court of their agreement on August 17, 2020. The court canceled previously scheduled conferences and other deadlines.
Judge Valerie Caproni dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, including attorneys’ fees, to either party, and directed the Clerk to close it. The parties could ask to reopen the case within 30 days if they showed good cause; they could also ask the court to retain authority to enforce their settlement by submitting the agreement and a proper request within that period.
The detailed version
- Primak v. Chai Lifeline, Inc. · No. 1:18-cv-09340
- Valerie Caproni
- Aug. 18, 2020
Background
On August 17, 2020, the parties notified the court that they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or the terms of that agreement.
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 could apply to reopen the case within 30 days. The application had to show good cause for keeping the case open despite the settlement, and a late application or one lacking a showing of good cause could be denied 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 that authority within the same 30-day period.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.