Huang v. Shanghai City Corp
- Lewis Liman
- 1:19-cv-07702
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Huer Huang v. Shanghai City Corp, Judge Liman approved the settlement and fees, then dismissed the action without prejudice to timely restoration.
The plaintiffs, defendants, plaintiffs’ counsel, and any party with a pending motion, conference, or deadline in the action.
What happened
In Huer Huang v. Shanghai City Corp, the court held a settlement hearing on August 1, 2022, and found that the settlement was fair and reasonable.
The court approved plaintiffs’ counsel’s request for attorneys’ fees and costs. It dismissed the action without costs and without prejudice to restoring it to the court’s calendar if an application was made within 30 days. Pending motions were dismissed as moot, and all conferences and deadlines were canceled.
Judge Lewis J. Liman issued the order. The opinion does not state the settlement’s terms or the amount of the approved fees and costs.
The detailed version
- Huang v. Shanghai City Corp · No. 1:19-cv-07702
- Lewis Liman
- Aug. 1, 2022
Background
The court held a hearing on the parties’ settlement on August 1, 2022. The hearing was memorialized by transcript. The opinion states that, for the reasons given at the hearing, the court found the settlement fair and reasonable. It does not provide the settlement’s terms.
Rulings
The court approved plaintiffs’ counsel’s request for attorneys’ fees and costs. It then ordered that the action be dismissed without costs and without prejudice to restoring the action to the court’s calendar, provided an application to restore was made within 30 days of the order. The court stated that an application to reopen filed more than 30 days after the order could be denied solely on that basis.
The court also dismissed any pending motions as moot and canceled all conferences and deadlines. Judge Lewis J. Liman signed the order. The opinion does not state the amount of attorneys’ fees and costs or otherwise describe the settlement terms.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.