Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 25, 2021

Williams v. Pizarro

Judge
Valerie Caproni
Docket
1:18-cv-05677
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureContract
In one sentence

In Williams v. Pizarro, Judge Caproni dismissed the case with prejudice after an agreement in principle, without costs, and allowed 30 days for a good-cause reopening request.

Who this affects

Melvin L. Williams and defendants DTS Alberto J. Pizarro and A.D.A. Joseph Goldstein; the case was closed under the stated settlement-related conditions.

What happened

Williams v. Pizarro involved an agreement in principle between the parties that resolved all issues. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or the settlement terms.

The court canceled scheduled conferences and deadlines, dismissed the case with prejudice, and ordered that neither party receive costs or attorneys’ fees. The clerk was directed to terminate open motions and close the case.

Judge Valerie Caproni allowed the parties 30 days to request reopening for good cause. During that period, they could also ask the court to retain authority to enforce their settlement agreement by submitting the agreement and a separate request.

The detailed version

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

Case
Williams v. Pizarro · No. 1:18-cv-05677
Judge
Valerie Caproni
Date
Mar. 25, 2021

Background

The court was notified through the magistrate on March 24, 2021, that the parties had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues. The opinion does not state the claims involved or the terms of the agreement.

Order

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 could apply to reopen the case within 30 days. Such an application had to show good cause for keeping the case open in light of the settlement. The order stated that a request filed after 30 days or without a showing of good cause could be denied solely on that basis.

The parties could also ask the court to retain jurisdiction, meaning continuing authority, to enforce the settlement agreement. To do so, they had to submit the settlement agreement and request an order expressly retaining that authority within the same 30-day period.

Disposition

The court dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs to either party, canceled deadlines, terminated open motions, and closed the case. It did not decide the underlying claims.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.