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

Calcano v. Wallpaperwarehouse.com L.L.C.

Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Docket
1:20-cv-07247
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureClass Action
In one sentence

In Calcano v. Wallpaperwarehouse.com, Judge Abrams discontinued the case after a settlement in principle, without costs and allowing timely restoration.

Who this affects

The named plaintiff and defendants are affected by the case’s discontinuance. The order also refers to similarly situated people but does not state how the settlement affects them.

What happened

Calcano v. Wallpaperwarehouse.com involved Marcos Calcano’s lawsuit against Wallpaperwarehouse.com L.L.C. and Wallpaper Warehouse Corporation, brought on behalf of himself and similarly situated people.

The court was told that the case had been settled in principle. It discontinued the action without costs to any party and allowed either side to seek restoration to the court’s docket within 30 days.

Judge Abrams ordered the Clerk of Court to close the case. The order did not state the settlement’s terms; it said that any request for the court to retain power to enforce the settlement had to be put on the public record and approved by the court within 30 days.

The detailed version

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

Case
Calcano v. Wallpaperwarehouse.com L.L.C. · No. 1:20-cv-07247
Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Date
Dec. 14, 2020

Background

Marcos Calcano sued Wallpaperwarehouse.com L.L.C. and Wallpaper Warehouse Corporation on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly situated. The order states that the court was informed that the case had been settled in principle.

Court’s action

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. The court stated that an application to reopen filed after that period could be denied solely because it was late.

The court also stated that, if the parties wanted the court to retain jurisdiction—that is, continuing authority—to enforce a 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 Clerk of Court was directed to close the case.

Disposition

The order discontinued the action and closed the case. It did not describe the settlement terms or decide the underlying claims. Judge Ronnie Abrams signed the order on December 14, 2020.

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.