Farley v. Diferro Contracting Corp.
- Ronnie Abrams
- 1:22-cv-00821
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
Farley v. Diferro Contracting Corp.: Judge Abrams discontinued the reported-settled case without costs and allowed timely restoration.
The plaintiff and defendants in the case are affected because the action was closed after a reported settlement, subject to a 30-day opportunity to seek restoration and a 30-day period for placing settlement terms on the public record if court enforcement is requested.
What happened
In Farley v. Diferro Contracting Corp., the court was told that the case had been settled.
The court discontinued the case without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring it if an application was made within 30 days. The court directed the Clerk of Court to close the case.
Judge Ronnie Abrams also said that any request to reopen filed after 30 days could be denied on that basis, and that any request for the court to enforce the settlement had to be placed on the public record and approved by the court within 30 days.
The detailed version
- Farley v. Diferro Contracting Corp. · No. 1:22-cv-00821
- Ronnie Abrams
- Sept. 19, 2022
Background
The opinion states that the Court was informed that this case had been settled. It does not describe the underlying claims or the settlement’s terms.
What the Court Did
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. The court stated that an application filed after that period could be denied solely because it was late.
The court also stated that, if the parties wanted it to retain jurisdiction to enforce the 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. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case.
Result
Judge Ronnie Abrams entered the discontinuance order based on the reported settlement. The opinion does not decide the merits of the parties’ underlying claims.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.