Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 29, 2022

Abreu v. Jenkinson's Pavilion

Judge
Vyskocil
Docket
1:22-cv-01210
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureClass Action
In one sentence

In Abreu v. Jenkinson’s Pavilion, Judge Vyskocil discontinued the action after a settlement in principle, allowing restoration by April 29, 2022, or dismissal with prejudice.

Who this affects

Luigi Abreu, Jenkinson’s Pavilion, and the people Abreu sought to represent as others similarly situated.

What happened

In Abreu v. Jenkinson’s Pavilion, Luigi Abreu told the court that the parties had reached a settlement in principle. The opinion does not describe the settlement’s terms.

The court discontinued the action without costs to either party and without prejudice to restoring it to the court’s calendar if the parties could not put their settlement in writing. Any request to restore the action had to be made by April 29, 2022.

Judge Vyskocil ordered that if no restoration request was made by that date, the action’s dismissal would be with prejudice. The court did not decide the underlying claims.

The detailed version

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

Case
Abreu v. Jenkinson's Pavilion · No. 1:22-cv-01210
Judge
Vyskocil
Date
Mar. 29, 2022

Background

Luigi Abreu brought the action individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated against Jenkinson’s Pavilion. The court received a letter from Abreu stating that the parties had reached a settlement in principle. The opinion does not provide the settlement’s terms or state whether any proposed class had been certified.

Order

The court ordered that the action was discontinued without costs to any party. The discontinuance was without prejudice to restoring the action to the court’s calendar if the parties could not memorialize their settlement in writing, meaning put the settlement into a written agreement. Any application to restore the action had to be made by April 29, 2022. If no such application was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice.

Disposition

The court entered an order of dismissal based on the parties’ reported settlement in principle. It did not reach or decide the underlying claims. The judge was Mary Kay Vyskocil, United States District Judge.

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.