Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Nov. 16, 2020

Jones v. Bakshiev

Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Docket
1:19-cv-04064
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureContract
In one sentence

In Jones v. Bakshiev, Judge Abrams discontinued the settled case without costs, allowing restoration if requested within 30 days.

Who this affects

Capri M. Jones, Ephraim Bakshiev, and Murray Enterprises Ltd.

What happened

Jones v. Bakshiev involved Capri M. Jones as plaintiff and Ephraim Bakshiev and Murray Enterprises Ltd. as defendants. The court said it had been told that the case had been settled.

The court discontinued the action without costs to any party. It allowed either side to ask to restore the case to the court’s docket within 30 days.

Judge Ronnie Abrams also stated that any request to reopen filed after 30 days could be denied solely because it was late. If the parties wanted the court to retain authority to enforce their settlement, the settlement terms had to be placed on the public record and approved by the court within that same period.

The detailed version

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

Case
Jones v. Bakshiev · No. 1:19-cv-04064
Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Date
Nov. 16, 2020

Background The opinion states that the court was informed that the case had been settled. It does not describe the claims, the settlement terms, or the parties’ positions on the underlying dispute.

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 docket if an application to restore it was made within 30 days. Any application to reopen filed after that period could be denied solely on that basis.

The court further stated that, if the parties wanted it to retain authority to enforce the settlement agreement, the agreement’s terms had to be placed on the public record and approved by the court within the same 30-day period. The order does not state that the court decided the merits of the underlying claims.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.