Fischer v. Verizon New York, Inc.
- Ronnie Abrams
- 1:18-cv-11628
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Fischer v. Verizon New York, Inc., Judge Abrams closed the settled case, allowing restoration within 60 days without fees or costs.
All parties to the action: James Fischer and Verizon New York, Inc., Verizon Communications, Inc., and Verizon Online, LLC.
What happened
In Fischer v. Verizon New York, Inc., the court was told that all parties had reached a settlement.
The court discontinued the action without fees or costs to any party. It allowed a party to ask to restore the action to the court’s docket within 60 days.
Judge Ronnie Abrams directed the Clerk of Court to close the case. The order also said that any request to reopen filed after 60 days could be denied on that basis, and that the court would retain power to enforce the settlement only if its terms were placed on the public record and approved by the court within that period.
The detailed version
- Fischer v. Verizon New York, Inc. · No. 1:18-cv-11628
- Ronnie Abrams
- Aug. 31, 2022
Background
The opinion states that the court was informed that a settlement had been reached among all parties. It does not describe the underlying claims or the settlement’s terms.
Order
The court ordered that the action be discontinued without fees or 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 60 days. The order stated that any application to reopen filed after that period could be denied solely because it was late.
The order further stated that, if the parties wanted the court to retain jurisdiction—the authority to enforce a settlement agreement—the settlement’s terms had to be placed on the public record and approved by the court within the same 60-day period. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case.
Disposition
Judge Ronnie Abrams entered the order on August 31, 2022. The action was discontinued under the stated conditions; the opinion does not decide the merits of the underlying dispute.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.