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

Miller v. August Aichhorn Center For Adolescent Residential Care, Inc.

Judge
Vyskocil
Docket
1:20-cv-10305
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureContract
In one sentence

In Miller v. August Aichhorn Center, Judge Vyskocil dismissed the settled case, allowing restoration by June 7, 2021, before dismissal with prejudice.

Who this affects

The plaintiff, Gregory Miller, and the defendants, including August Aichhorn Center for Adolescent Residential Care, Inc., were affected by the settlement-based dismissal and the deadline for seeking restoration.

What happened

In Miller v. August Aichhorn Center For Adolescent Residential Care, Inc., the mediator reported that the parties had reached agreement on all issues. The opinion does not describe the agreement's terms.

The court discontinued the action without costs to any party and allowed either side to seek restoration to the court's calendar by June 7, 2021. The order states that if no restoration application was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice.

Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil entered the dismissal order on May 6, 2021, and adjourned all other dates and deadlines without setting a new date.

The detailed version

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

Case
Miller v. August Aichhorn Center For Adolescent Residential Care, Inc. · No. 1:20-cv-10305
Judge
Vyskocil
Date
May 6, 2021

Background

The court received a mediator's report stating that the parties had reached agreement on all issues in the case. The opinion does not provide the terms of that agreement or explain the underlying claims.

Ruling

The court ordered that the action be discontinued without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring the action to the court's calendar if an application to restore it was made by June 7, 2021. The order further states that if no application was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice. The court also adjourned all other dates and deadlines without setting a new date. This order resolved the case based on the parties' reported agreement and did not decide the underlying legal claims.

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.