Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 1, 2021

Hamilton Sundstrand Corporation v. Aircraft Propeller Service, LLC

Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Docket
1:19-cv-06472
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureContract
In one sentence

In Hamilton Sundstrand v. Aircraft Propeller Services, Judge Abrams discontinued the settled case without costs and without prejudice to timely restoration.

Who this affects

The plaintiffs and Aircraft Propeller Services, LLC were affected because their settled action was discontinued and the case was closed, subject to the stated 30-day procedures for restoration or court retention of authority to enforce the settlement.

What happened

Hamilton Sundstrand Corporation and the other plaintiffs sued Aircraft Propeller Services, LLC. The court understood that the parties had settled all issues.

The court discontinued the action without costs to any party. It allowed a party to seek restoration of the action within 30 days and directed the Clerk of Court to close the case.

Judge Ronnie Abrams also stated that any request to reopen filed after 30 days could be denied on that basis. The court would retain authority to enforce the settlement only if its terms were placed on the public record and approved by the court within that period.

The detailed version

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

Case
Hamilton Sundstrand Corporation v. Aircraft Propeller Service, LLC · No. 1:19-cv-06472
Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Date
Feb. 1, 2021

Background

The court stated that it understood the parties had reached a settlement on all issues. The order does not describe the underlying claims or the settlement terms.

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 was made within 30 days. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case.

The order stated that any application to reopen had to be filed within 30 days of the order and that an application filed later could be denied solely because it was late. If the parties wanted the court to retain jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement, they had to place the agreement’s terms on the public record and obtain the court’s approval within the same 30-day period.

Disposition

This was a procedural order resolving the case based on settlement rather than deciding the underlying claims. Judge Ronnie Abrams discontinued the action on the stated terms.

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.