Graciano v. New Chapter, Inc.
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:20-cv-10517
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Graciano v. New Chapter, Inc., Judge Caproni dismissed the settled case with prejudice and without costs, while permitting limited requests to reopen.
Sandy Graciano and New Chapter, Inc.; all scheduled conferences and deadlines were canceled, the case was closed, and both parties were subject to the dismissal and 30-day procedures for seeking reopening or continued court authority to enforce the settlement.
What happened
In Graciano v. New Chapter, Inc., the parties told the court they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues.
The court canceled all previously scheduled conferences and deadlines, dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, including attorneys’ fees, terminated open motions, and closed the case.
Judge Valerie Caproni allowed the parties to apply within 30 days to reopen the case for good cause; they could also ask the court to retain power to enforce their settlement by submitting the agreement and a request within that period.
The detailed version
- Graciano v. New Chapter, Inc. · No. 1:20-cv-10517
- Valerie Caproni
- Apr. 5, 2021
Background
On April 2, 2021, the parties notified the court that they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues. The order does not describe the settlement’s terms or the underlying claims.
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.
Within 30 days, the parties could apply to reopen the case. The application had to show good cause for keeping the case open in light of the settlement, and requests filed after 30 days or without a showing of good cause could be denied on that basis. The parties could also ask the court to retain jurisdiction, meaning authority, to enforce the settlement agreement. To do so, they had to submit the agreement and a request for an order expressly retaining jurisdiction within the same 30-day period.
Effect
The order ended the case based on the parties’ agreement rather than deciding the underlying claims. It did not award costs or attorneys’ fees to either party.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.