Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 3, 2022

Tavarez v. ABCO Group, Inc.

Judge
Vyskocil
Docket
1:21-cv-09799
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureClass Action
In one sentence

In Tavarez v. ABCO Group, Inc., Judge Vyskocil discontinued the action without costs and without prejudice to restoration by April 3, 2022.

Who this affects

Victoriano Tavarez and ABCO Group, Inc.; the order also concerns the group of people described in the complaint as others similarly situated.

What happened

Tavarez v. ABCO Group, Inc. involved Plaintiff Victoriano Tavarez’s case against ABCO Group, Inc. The court received a letter stating that the parties had reached a settlement in principle.

The court ordered the action discontinued without costs to either party. The action could be restored to the court’s calendar if the parties could not put their settlement in writing, but any request to restore it had to be made by April 3, 2022.

Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil further ordered that if no request to restore the action was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice.

The detailed version

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

Case
Tavarez v. ABCO Group, Inc. · No. 1:21-cv-09799
Judge
Vyskocil
Date
Mar. 3, 2022

Background

Plaintiff Victoriano Tavarez filed the action individually and on behalf of others similarly situated against ABCO Group, Inc. The opinion states that the parties reached a settlement in principle. It does not describe the settlement’s terms or state whether the settlement was ultimately put into a written agreement.

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 calendar if the parties were unable to memorialize their settlement in writing. The Court required any application to restore the action to be made by April 3, 2022.

The order also states that if no application to restore the action was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice, meaning the action could not then be restored through that procedure. The opinion cites a Second Circuit decision concerning this type of conditional dismissal.

Ruling

Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil ordered the action discontinued on the stated settlement-related terms. The order did not decide the underlying claims or describe any merits ruling.

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.