Ruiz Florez v. Pisces Bar & Tavern, Inc.
- Ronnie Abrams
- 1:19-cv-11032
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Ruiz Florez v. Pisces Bar & Tavern, Judge Abrams discontinued the action after the parties reported a settlement in principle.
Carlos Ruiz Florez and Pisces Bar & Tavern, Inc.; the action was closed, with a 30-day period to seek restoration and a 30-day period to place any settlement terms on the public record if the parties wanted the court to retain enforcement authority.
What happened
Ruiz Florez v. Pisces Bar & Tavern, Inc. was discontinued after the parties reported that they had reached a settlement in principle on all issues.
The court closed the case without costs to either party and allowed either side to seek restoration within 30 days. The scheduled post-discovery conference was also adjourned indefinitely.
Judge Ronnie Abrams directed the Clerk of Court to close the case and explained that any settlement-enforcement jurisdiction would require the agreement to be made public and approved by the court within 30 days.
The detailed version
- Ruiz Florez v. Pisces Bar & Tavern, Inc. · No. 1:19-cv-11032
- Ronnie Abrams
- Dec. 16, 2020
Background
According to the parties’ joint letter, the parties had reached a settlement in principle covering all issues in the case.
Ruling
The court ordered that the action be discontinued without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring it to the court’s docket if an application to restore the action was made within 30 days. The court stated that an application 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 authority to enforce their 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 post-discovery conference scheduled for December 18, 2020, was adjourned indefinitely, and the Clerk of Court was directed to close the case.
Effect
The order ended the case based on the reported settlement in principle and did not decide the underlying disputes. The parties retained the stated 30-day opportunity to seek restoration of the action.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.