Conneaut Creek Ship Repair, Inc. v. Versitec Marine & Industrial
- Ronnie Abrams
- 1:20-cv-03435
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Conneaut Creek Ship Repair v. Versitec Marine Services, Judge Abrams discontinued the settled case without costs, allowing restoration within 30 days.
Conneaut Creek Ship Repair, Inc. and Versitec Marine Services, Inc., doing business as Versitec Marine & Industrial; the order discontinued their settled case and set a 30-day period for seeking restoration.
What happened
Conneaut Creek Ship Repair, Inc. v. Versitec Marine Services, Inc. was reported settled after the parties signed an agreement on August 14, 2020. The parties expected the final payment to be made on October 15, 2020.
The court discontinued the case without costs to either party and without prejudice to restoring it within 30 days. The court also closed the case and postponed the scheduled conference and remaining deadlines indefinitely.
Judge Ronnie Abrams ordered that any request to restore the case be filed within 30 days. The court said the settlement terms would have to be placed on the public record and approved by the court during that period if the parties wanted the court to retain authority to enforce the settlement.
The detailed version
- Conneaut Creek Ship Repair, Inc. v. Versitec Marine & Industrial · No. 1:20-cv-03435
- Ronnie Abrams
- Oct. 1, 2020
Background
The court stated that the parties had reported the case settled. Their joint letter said they executed a settlement agreement on August 14, 2020, and expected the final payment to Plaintiff on October 15, 2020.
Ruling
The court ordered that the action be discontinued without costs to either party and without prejudice to restoring the action to the court’s docket if an application was made within 30 days. It warned that an application filed later could be denied solely because it was late.
The court also stated that, if the parties wanted it to retain jurisdiction—meaning authority 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 initial conference and remaining deadlines were postponed indefinitely, and the Clerk of Court was directed to close the case.
What the Opinion Did Not Decide
The order did not address the underlying claims or determine which party would have prevailed on the merits. It disposed of the case based on the reported settlement.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.