Nisbett v. Beis Travel, LLC

Background

Kareem Nisbett sued BÉIS Travel, LLC individually and on behalf of other similarly situated people. On June 17, 2021, the parties notified the court that they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues.

Court’s Orders

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

The court also explained that, if the parties wanted it to retain jurisdiction—the authority to enforce the settlement agreement—they had to submit the settlement agreement and request an order expressly retaining jurisdiction within the same 30-day period.

Class-Action Effect

The court ordered the clerk to remove the language stating that Nisbett sued on behalf of all other similarly situated people. Because the parties had not told the court that they intended to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e), which governs certain class-action settlements and dismissals, the dismissal and any settlement were effective only between Nisbett and BÉIS Travel. They did not bind absent putative class members.