Mercer v. Gittings
- Vyskocil
- 1:20-cv-06035
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Mercer v. Gittings, Judge Vyskocil discontinued the settled case without costs, allowing restoration by October 19, 2020, otherwise with prejudice.
The plaintiff, Stacey Mercer, and the defendant, Elizabeth Anne Gittings, doing business as Moroccan Luxury Suites; the action was discontinued subject to the stated restoration deadline.
What happened
Mercer v. Gittings concerned a case in which the plaintiff informed the court that the parties had reached a settlement agreement.
The court discontinued the case without costs to either party. The case could be restored to the court’s calendar if an application was made by October 19, 2020.
Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil ordered that if no restoration application was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice.
The detailed version
- Mercer v. Gittings · No. 1:20-cv-06035
- Vyskocil
- Sept. 17, 2020
Background
The plaintiff informed the court by letter that the parties had reached a settlement agreement.
Ruling
The court ordered that the action be discontinued without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring the action to the court’s calendar if an application to restore it was made by October 19, 2020. The order further stated that if no application was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice, meaning the action could not then be reopened. Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil signed the order.
Effect
The opinion ended the action based on the reported settlement and set a deadline for seeking restoration. It did not decide the underlying claims.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.