Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 22, 2021

Sanchez v. Penske Media Corporation

Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Docket
1:21-cv-04130
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureClass Action
In one sentence

After a settlement was reported in principle, Judge Abrams discontinued Sanchez v. Penske Media without costs, allowing restoration within 30 days.

Who this affects

Cristian Sanchez, the people he sought to represent, and Penske Media Corporation; the action was closed subject to a possible application for restoration within 30 days.

What happened

In Sanchez v. Penske Media Corporation, Cristian Sanchez brought an action on behalf of himself and others described as similarly situated against Penske Media Corporation. The court was told that the case had been settled in principle.

The court discontinued the action without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring it if an application was made within 30 days. The court also stated that any request to keep jurisdiction to enforce a settlement would require placing the settlement terms on the public record and obtaining the court’s approval within that period.

Judge Ronnie Abrams directed the Clerk of Court to close the case. The order did not decide the underlying claims.

The detailed version

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

Case
Sanchez v. Penske Media Corporation · No. 1:21-cv-04130
Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Date
June 22, 2021

Background

Cristian Sanchez sued Penske Media Corporation on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated. The opinion states that the Court was informed that the case had been settled in principle. It does not provide the settlement’s terms or state that a final settlement had been approved.

Court’s Order

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. It stated that an application to reopen filed after that period could be denied solely because it was late.

The Court further 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.

Effect of the Order

Judge Ronnie Abrams did not decide the merits of the claims. The case was discontinued and closed, subject to the stated 30-day procedure for seeking restoration.

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.