Maddy v. Perry Ellis International, Inc.
- Ronnie Abrams
- 1:22-cv-04151
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Maddy v. Perry Ellis, Judge Abrams discontinued the settled-in-principle case without costs, allowing restoration within 30 days.
Veronica Maddy, the defendant identified in the opinion’s caption as Perry Ellic, Inc., and the action’s potential similarly situated participants.
What happened
Maddy v. Perry Ellis International, Inc. was reported to have been settled in principle. The opinion does not describe the settlement’s terms or decide the parties’ underlying claims.
The court discontinued the action without costs to either party and without prejudice to restoring it within 30 days. It directed the Clerk of Court to close the case.
Judge Ronnie Abrams also stated that any request for the court to retain authority to enforce the settlement had to be placed on the public record and approved by the court within the same 30-day period.
The detailed version
- Maddy v. Perry Ellis International, Inc. · No. 1:22-cv-04151
- Ronnie Abrams
- Aug. 4, 2022
Background
The court stated that it had been informed that the case had been settled in principle. The opinion does not provide the settlement’s terms or address the merits of Veronica Maddy’s claims against Perry Ellic, Inc., the defendant name shown in the opinion’s caption.
Order
The court ordered that the action be discontinued without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring the action to the court’s docket if an application to restore it was made within 30 days. It warned that an application filed after that period could be denied solely because it was late. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case.
The court further stated that, if the parties wanted the court to retain authority to enforce a settlement agreement, the agreement’s terms had to be placed on the public record and approved by the court within the same 30-day period.
Disposition
Judge Ronnie Abrams discontinued the action without costs and without prejudice to restoration within 30 days. The order did not decide the underlying claims.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.