Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 21, 2022

Delva v. Charter Communications, Inc.

Judge
Vyskocil
Docket
1:19-cv-11793
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureContract
In one sentence

In Delva v. Charter Communications, Judge Vyskocil discontinued the action after settlement in principle, allowing restoration by April 21, 2022.

Who this affects

Paul Delva and Charter Communications, Inc. and Spectrum Management Holding Company, LLC. The action was discontinued based on the parties’ reported settlement in principle, with a possible request to restore the case by April 21, 2022; otherwise, the dismissal would be with prejudice.

What happened

In Delva v. Charter Communications, Inc., Paul Delva told the court that the parties had reached a settlement in principle.

The court discontinued the action without costs and allowed either side to seek restoration if the parties could not put their settlement in writing, provided the request was made by April 21, 2022.

Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil ordered that the dismissal would become with prejudice if no restoration request was made by that date.

The detailed version

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

Case
Delva v. Charter Communications, Inc. · No. 1:19-cv-11793
Judge
Vyskocil
Date
Mar. 21, 2022

Background

Paul Delva informed the court that the parties had reached a settlement in principle. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or the proposed settlement terms.

Ruling

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 could not memorialize their settlement in writing. The court required any application to restore the action to be made by April 21, 2022. If no such application was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice, meaning the action could not be restored under that order.

Effect

The case was closed subject to the stated restoration deadline. The order did not decide the underlying claims.

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.