Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 31, 2022

Doncouse v. Ricky Convenience Corp

Judge
Valerie Caproni
Docket
1:21-cv-05662
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureContract
In one sentence

In Doncouse v. Ricky Convenience, Judge Caproni dismissed the settled case with prejudice and without costs, subject to a 30-day reopening procedure.

Who this affects

Graciela Doncouse, Ricky Convenience Corp, and 224 Eighth Ave. Corporation; the case was closed after the parties reported an agreement in principle.

What happened

In Graciela Doncouse v. Ricky Convenience Corp. and 224 Eighth Ave. Corporation, 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 all open motions, and directed the clerk to close the case.

Judge Valerie Caproni allowed the parties 30 days to seek reopening for good cause. During that period, they could also ask the court to retain authority to enforce their settlement by submitting the agreement and a formal request.

The detailed version

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

Case
Doncouse v. Ricky Convenience Corp · No. 1:21-cv-05662
Judge
Valerie Caproni
Date
Jan. 31, 2022

Background

On January 28, 2022, the parties notified the court that they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues in the case. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or the settlement’s terms.

Court’s action

The court ordered that all previously scheduled conferences and other deadlines be canceled. 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 court provided a 30-day period during which either party could apply to reopen the case. Such an application had to show good cause for keeping the case open in light of the settlement and had to be filed within 30 days. The court stated that a request filed after that period or without a showing of good cause could be denied on that basis alone.

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

Result

Judge Valerie Caproni dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, canceled the scheduled proceedings and deadlines, terminated the open motions, and closed the case. The opinion does not decide the merits of the underlying claims.

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.