Paguada v. Habermaass Corporation, Inc.
- Vyskocil
- 1:22-cv-01091
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
Paguada v. Habermaass, Judge Vyskocil discontinued the case after a settlement in principle, allowing restoration by May 20, 2022, or dismissal with prejudice.
Josue Paguada and Habermaass Corporation, Inc.; the action was discontinued based on the reported settlement in principle, subject to restoration by May 20, 2022, and otherwise dismissal with prejudice.
What happened
In Paguada v. Habermaass Corporation, Inc., the defendant informed the court that the parties had reached a settlement in principle. The opinion does not describe the underlying dispute or settlement 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 case had to be made by May 20, 2022.
Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil ordered that if no restoration request was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice.
The detailed version
- Paguada v. Habermaass Corporation, Inc. · No. 1:22-cv-01091
- Vyskocil
- Apr. 19, 2022
Background The defendant filed a letter informing the court that the parties had reached a settlement in principle. The opinion does not state the claims, the settlement’s terms, or whether the settlement was ultimately completed in writing.
Court’s action The court ordered that the action be discontinued without costs to any party. The discontinuance was 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 May 20, 2022.
Effect of the order The court further ordered that if no application to restore the action was made by May 20, 2022, the dismissal would be with prejudice. The opinion does not decide the underlying dispute or determine whether either party was legally right on the merits.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.