Tatum-Rios v. Good Stock Carmine, LLC
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:20-cv-06246
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Tatum-Rios v. Good Stock Carmine, LLC, Judge Caproni dismissed the settled case with prejudice and without costs, while allowing a 30-day reopening request.
The parties to Tatum-Rios v. Good Stock Carmine, LLC were affected: the case was dismissed with prejudice and without costs, scheduled proceedings were canceled, open motions were terminated, and the case was closed. The parties retained a 30-day opportunity to seek reopening or court enforcement jurisdiction under the stated conditions.
What happened
In Tatum-Rios v. Good Stock Carmine, LLC, the parties told the court they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues. The order does not describe the settlement’s terms or the underlying claims.
The court canceled all scheduled conferences and other deadlines. It also directed the clerk to terminate all open motions and close the case.
Judge Caproni dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, including attorneys’ fees, to either party. The parties could ask to reopen the case within 30 days by showing good cause; they could also ask the court to retain jurisdiction to enforce their settlement by submitting the agreement and a separate request.
The detailed version
- Tatum-Rios v. Good Stock Carmine, LLC · No. 1:20-cv-06246
- Valerie Caproni
- Dec. 6, 2020
Background
On December 3, 2020, the parties notified the court that they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues. The order does not provide the settlement’s terms or describe the claims asserted in the case.
Court’s action
The court canceled all previously scheduled conferences and other deadlines. It dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs (including attorneys’ fees) to either party. The clerk was directed to terminate all open motions and close the case.
The parties were permitted to apply to reopen the case within 30 days. Any application had to show good cause for keeping the case open despite the settlement, and an application filed after 30 days or without a showing of good cause could be denied solely on that basis.
If the parties wanted the court to retain jurisdiction—that is, authority to enforce the settlement agreement—they had to submit the agreement and request an order expressly retaining jurisdiction within the same 30-day period. The order cited Hendrickson v. United States, 791 F.3d 354 (2d Cir. 2015), in connection with that procedure.
Disposition
Judge Valerie Caproni dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, terminated the open motions, and directed that the case be closed, subject to the stated 30-day procedures.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.