Thomas v. Stottlemire
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:20-cv-07528
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Thomas v. Stottlemire, Judge Caproni dismissed the settled case with prejudice and without costs, while allowing limited reopening requests.
Larry Thomas, David Stottlemire, and Mercer Transportation Co., Inc.; the case was closed subject to the order’s limited 30-day procedures.
What happened
In Thomas v. Stottlemire, the parties told the court that they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues.
The court canceled scheduled conferences and deadlines, dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, terminated all open motions, and closed the case. Within 30 days, the parties may ask to reopen the case if they show good cause. They may also ask the court to retain jurisdiction to enforce their settlement by submitting the agreement and a specific request within that period.
Judge Valerie Caproni entered the order on January 29, 2021.
The detailed version
- Thomas v. Stottlemire · No. 1:20-cv-07528
- Valerie Caproni
- Jan. 29, 2021
Background
Larry Thomas sued David Stottlemire and Mercer Transportation Co., Inc. The opinion states that, on January 29, 2021, the parties notified the court that they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues.
Ruling
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 of Court was directed to terminate all open motions and close the case.
Possible Reopening or Enforcement
Within 30 days of the order, the parties may apply to reopen the case. The application must show good cause for keeping the case open in light of the settlement. A request filed after 30 days or without a showing of good cause may be denied on that basis alone.
If the parties want the court to retain jurisdiction—that is, authority to enforce their settlement agreement—they must, within the same 30-day period, submit the settlement agreement under Rule 6.A of the court’s Individual Practices and request an order expressly retaining jurisdiction.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.