Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 11, 2021

Husarsky v. Equifax Information Services, LLC

Judge
Valerie Caproni
Docket
1:21-cv-00759
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureContract
In one sentence

In Husarsky v. Equifax, Judge Caproni dismissed the settled case with prejudice, without costs, while allowing a 30-day reopening application.

Who this affects

Ira Husarsky and defendants Equifax Information Services, LLC, Bank of America, N.A., and Citibank, N.A.; the case was dismissed with prejudice and without costs, subject to the stated 30-day procedures for reopening or retaining authority to enforce the settlement.

What happened

In Husarsky v. Equifax Information Services, LLC, the parties told the court they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues.

The court canceled all scheduled conferences and deadlines, dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, including attorneys’ fees, terminated pending motions, and closed the case. The parties could ask to reopen the case within 30 days by showing good cause.

Judge Caproni also said the parties could ask the court to keep authority to enforce their settlement if they submitted the settlement agreement and a proper request within that 30-day period.

The detailed version

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

Case
Husarsky v. Equifax Information Services, LLC · No. 1:21-cv-00759
Judge
Valerie Caproni
Date
June 11, 2021

Background

On June 10, 2021, the parties notified the court that they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or the settlement’s terms.

Court’s Actions

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.

Reopening and Settlement Enforcement

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

The court also stated that, if the parties wanted it to retain jurisdiction—authority to enforce—the settlement agreement, they had to submit the 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, terminated the open motions, and closed the case. The order did not decide the underlying claims on their merits.

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.