Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 6, 2021

Quezada v. Shar Products Company

Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Docket
1:21-cv-01093
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureClass Action
In one sentence

In Quezada v. Shar Products Company, Judge Abrams discontinued the action after the parties reported a settlement in principle, without costs and without prejudice to timely restoration.

Who this affects

The plaintiff, Jose Quezada, and defendant Shar Products Company; the opinion does not state the settlement’s terms or its effect on the other people identified in the complaint.

What happened

Jose Quezada brought Quezada v. Shar Products Company on behalf of himself and others similarly situated. The parties told the court in an April 5, 2021 letter that they had reached a settlement in principle.

The court discontinued the action without costs to either party and without prejudice to restoring it to the court’s docket within 30 days. The opinion does not state the settlement’s terms.

Judge Ronnie Abrams directed the Clerk of Court to close the case. The court also said that any request to retain jurisdiction to enforce the settlement had to place the settlement terms on the public record and receive the court’s approval within the same 30-day period.

The detailed version

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

Case
Quezada v. Shar Products Company · No. 1:21-cv-01093
Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Date
Apr. 6, 2021

Background

Jose Quezada sued Shar Products Company on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated. The opinion states that, in an April 5, 2021 letter, the parties reported reaching a settlement in principle. It does not describe the claims or the settlement terms.

Disposition

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 it was made within 30 days. The court stated that an application filed after that period might be denied solely because it was late.

The court also stated that, if the parties wanted the court to retain jurisdiction to enforce a 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 Clerk of Court was directed to close the case. Judge Ronnie Abrams signed the order.

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.