Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled May 2, 2022

Girotto v. Chloe Boutique S.A., Inc.

Judge
Valerie Caproni
Docket
1:21-cv-10098
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureContract
In one sentence

In Girotto v. Chloe Boutique, Judge Caproni dismissed the settled case with prejudice, canceled deadlines, and closed the case.

Who this affects

Luigi Girotto, Chloe Boutique S.A., Inc., and Soho Centrale, LLC.

What happened

In Girotto v. Chloe Boutique S.A., Inc., the parties told the court that they had reached an agreement in principle to resolve the case and asked for 30 days to finalize it.

The court granted the request, canceled all scheduled conferences and other deadlines, dismissed the case with prejudice, ordered that neither side pay costs or attorneys’ fees, terminated all open motions, and closed the case.

Judge Valerie Caproni said the parties could seek to reopen the case within 30 days by showing good cause. They could also ask the court to retain power to enforce their settlement by submitting the agreement and a separate request within that period.

The detailed version

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

Case
Girotto v. Chloe Boutique S.A., Inc. · No. 1:21-cv-10098
Judge
Valerie Caproni
Date
May 2, 2022

Background

Defendants Chloe Boutique S.A., Inc. and Soho Centrale, LLC, through their counsel, told the court that they and plaintiff Luigi Girotto had reached an agreement in principle to resolve the case. With the plaintiff’s counsel’s consent, defendants asked the court to stay all deadlines for 30 days so the parties could finalize the agreement and file a dismissal document.

Ruling

The court granted the application. It canceled all previously scheduled conferences and other deadlines, dismissed the case with prejudice, and ordered that neither party would receive costs, including attorneys’ fees, from the other. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate all open motions and close the case.

The order allowed the parties to apply to reopen the case within 30 days. Such an application had to show good cause for keeping the case open despite the settlement and had to be filed within that 30-day period. The court also stated that, if the parties wanted the court to retain jurisdiction—the authority to enforce their settlement agreement—they had to submit the agreement and request that authority within the same 30-day period. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or the settlement’s terms.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.