Nisbett v. GoForward, Inc.
- Vyskocil
- 1:20-cv-02384
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Nisbett v. GoForward, Inc., Judge Vyskocil discontinued the case after a settlement in principle, allowing restoration by January 8, 2021.
Kareem Nisbett, GoForward, Inc., and the persons identified in the caption as similarly situated were affected by the discontinuance. The action could be restored if an application was made by January 8, 2021; otherwise, the dismissal would be with prejudice.
What happened
Nisbett v. GoForward, Inc. involved Kareem Nisbett’s lawsuit against GoForward, Inc. The court received a letter stating that the parties had reached a settlement in principle.
The order did not decide the underlying claims. Instead, it discontinued the action without costs to either party and allowed either side to ask to restore the case to the court’s calendar by January 8, 2021.
Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil ordered that if no restoration request was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice, meaning the action could not be brought back. The order was dated November 24, 2020.
The detailed version
- Nisbett v. GoForward, Inc. · No. 1:20-cv-02384
- Vyskocil
- Nov. 24, 2020
Background
The caption identifies Kareem Nisbett as the plaintiff, suing individually and on behalf of other similarly situated persons, and GoForward, Inc. as the defendant. The court received a letter from GoForward informing it that the parties had reached a settlement in principle.
Ruling
The court entered an order of dismissal and discontinued the action without costs to any party. The discontinuance was without prejudice to restoring the action to the court’s calendar if an application to restore it was made by January 8, 2021. The opinion does not state whether the parties later completed or obtained approval of a settlement.
The order further states that if no restoration application was made by January 8, 2021, the dismissal would be with prejudice. The court did not address the merits of the underlying claims.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.