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

Nelson v. Bento Nouveau Inc.

Judge
Valerie Caproni
Docket
1:20-cv-01700
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureContract
In one sentence

In Nelson v. Bento Nouveau Inc., Judge Caproni dismissed the settled case with prejudice and without costs, allowing limited applications to reopen.

Who this affects

The parties to Nelson v. Bento Nouveau Inc.—Kareem Nelson, Bento Nouveau Inc. d/b/a Bento Sushi, and 173 Bway Blue LLC—were affected by the dismissal and settlement-related procedures.

What happened

Nelson v. Bento Nouveau Inc. involved an agreement in principle between the parties resolving all issues. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims.

The court canceled scheduled conferences and deadlines, terminated all open motions, and directed the Clerk to close the case.

Judge Valerie Caproni dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, including attorneys’ fees. Within 30 days, the parties could apply to reopen the case by showing good cause; they could also ask the court to retain jurisdiction to enforce their settlement agreement by submitting the agreement and a proper request.

The detailed version

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

Case
Nelson v. Bento Nouveau Inc. · No. 1:20-cv-01700
Judge
Valerie Caproni
Date
Sept. 11, 2020

Background

On September 10, 2020, the parties notified the court that they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues. The order does not describe the underlying claims or the settlement’s terms.

Order

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.

Within 30 days of the order, the parties could apply to reopen the case. Any application had to show good cause for keeping the case open despite the settlement and had to be filed within that 30-day period. The order states that a late application or one without a showing of good cause could be denied on that basis alone.

The parties could also ask the court to retain jurisdiction—meaning authority to enforce the settlement agreement—if they submitted the agreement and a request for an order expressly retaining jurisdiction within the same 30-day period.

Disposition

Judge Valerie Caproni dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs and directed that it be closed, subject to the stated 30-day procedures for seeking reopening or requesting retained jurisdiction to enforce the settlement.

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.