Tavarez v. VSC Holdings, Inc.
- Ronnie Abrams
- 1:21-cv-09885
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Tavarez v. VSC Holdings, Judge Abrams discontinued the action without prejudice while the parties finalized a settlement.
Victorianno Tavarez, the others identified in the complaint as similarly situated, and VSC Holdings, Inc.; the action was discontinued subject to a possible timely request for restoration.
What happened
In Tavarez v. VSC Holdings, Inc., Victorianno Tavarez brought the action individually and on behalf of others similarly situated against VSC Holdings, Inc. The court was told that the parties were finalizing a settlement agreement.
The court discontinued the action without costs to either party and without prejudice to restoring it to the court’s docket within 30 days. The court directed the Clerk of Court to close the case.
Judge Ronnie Abrams also stated that any request to reopen filed after 30 days could be denied solely because it was late. If the parties wanted the court to retain authority to enforce a settlement, they had to place the settlement terms on the public record and obtain the court’s approval within that same 30-day period.
The detailed version
- Tavarez v. VSC Holdings, Inc. · No. 1:21-cv-09885
- Ronnie Abrams
- Mar. 3, 2022
Background
Victorianno Tavarez sued VSC Holdings, Inc., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated. The opinion states that the parties were in the process of finalizing a settlement agreement. It does not describe the underlying claims or the proposed settlement’s terms.
Court’s action
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. The court stated that any application to reopen filed after that period could be denied solely because it was late.
The court also stated that, if the parties wanted the court to retain jurisdiction—that is, authority—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. The order did not decide the underlying claims or the merits of the dispute.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.