Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 14, 2020

Williams v. Digi-Key Corporation

Judge
Vyskocil
Docket
1:20-cv-01735
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureContract
In one sentence

In Williams v. Digi-Key Corporation, Judge Vyskocil scheduled a conference to discuss the proposed consent decree and questioned retaining jurisdiction.

Who this affects

The parties to Williams v. Digi-Key Corporation and their proposed settlement.

What happened

In Williams v. Digi-Key Corporation, the parties jointly asked the court to approve a proposed consent decree resolving their case.

The proposed decree said the court would keep jurisdiction for 36 months. The court noted that it usually does not retain jurisdiction to enforce settlement agreements and that similar cases have also ended through voluntary dismissals.

Judge Vyskocil ordered the parties to attend a telephone conference on October 30, 2020, to discuss the proposed decree. The order did not approve or reject the decree.

The detailed version

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

Case
Williams v. Digi-Key Corporation · No. 1:20-cv-01735
Judge
Vyskocil
Date
Oct. 14, 2020

Background

The parties jointly requested judicial approval of a proposed consent decree. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or the decree's other terms.

Issue

The proposed consent decree stated that the court's jurisdiction would continue for 36 months. The court noted that its individual practice rules generally provide that it will not retain jurisdiction to enforce settlement agreements. The court also observed that similar cases had been resolved through stipulations of voluntary dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii).

Court's Action

The court ordered the parties to appear by telephone on October 30, 2020, for a conference about the proposed consent decree. It did not approve or reject the decree in this order. The court stated that the parties were free to settle on terms they chose and would be bound by the terms of any stipulation of voluntary dismissal.

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.