Balkum v. Clemens
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:21-cv-08933
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Balkum v. Clemens, Judge Caproni dismissed the settled case with prejudice and without costs, allowing a 30-day reopening request.
Francis J. Balkum III, Alan Clemens, and The Clemens Group, Inc.; the case was dismissed with prejudice and without costs, subject to the stated 30-day procedures for seeking reopening or court jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement.
What happened
In Balkum v. Clemens, the court was told that the parties had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or the agreement’s terms.
The court canceled scheduled conferences and deadlines, dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, including attorneys’ fees, and directed the Clerk to close the case and terminate open motions. The parties could ask to reopen within 30 days by showing good cause in light of their agreement.
Judge Valerie Caproni issued the order. She also stated that the parties could ask the court to retain jurisdiction to enforce their settlement agreement if they submitted the agreement and a jurisdiction request within the same 30-day period.
The detailed version
- Balkum v. Clemens · No. 1:21-cv-08933
- Valerie Caproni
- Mar. 3, 2022
Background
On March 2, 2022, the court was notified by the magistrate judge that the parties had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues. The opinion does not identify the underlying claims or provide the terms of that agreement.
Order
Judge Valerie Caproni ordered that all previously scheduled conferences and other deadlines be canceled. She dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, including attorneys’ fees, to either party. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate all open motions and close the case.
The parties were allowed to apply to reopen the case within 30 days of the order. Any such application had to show good cause for keeping the case open in light of the parties’ settlement. The court stated that a request filed after 30 days or without a showing of good cause could be denied solely on that basis.
The order also provided that, if the parties wanted the court to retain jurisdiction to enforce their settlement agreement, they had to submit the agreement under Rule 7.A of the court’s Individual Practices and request an order expressly retaining jurisdiction, both within the same 30-day period.
Disposition
The court dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, canceled the scheduled proceedings and deadlines, terminated open motions, and directed that the case be closed. The order did not decide the underlying legal claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.