Abreu v. Elderly Instruments, Inc.

Background

The parties notified the court on September 19, 2022, that they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues in the case. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or the settlement’s terms.

Court’s Orders

The court canceled all previously scheduled conferences and other deadlines. It dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, including attorneys’ fees, to either party. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate all open motions and close the case.

The parties were permitted to apply to reopen the case within 30 days. The application had to show good cause for keeping the case open in light of the settlement. The court stated that a request filed after 30 days, or filed without a showing of good cause, could be denied on that basis alone.

The court also explained that, if the parties wanted the court to retain jurisdiction—meaning continuing authority—to enforce their settlement agreement, they had to submit the agreement and request an order expressly retaining that authority within the same 30-day period.

Putative Class Members

The court directed the Clerk to remove from the caption the words “individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated” after Luigi Abreu’s name. Because the parties had not notified the court that they intended to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e), which governs court approval of certain class settlements, the dismissal and any settlement were effective only between Abreu and Elderly Instruments. They did not bind absent putative class members.

Disposition

Judge Valerie Caproni dismissed the case with prejudice, without costs or attorneys’ fees to either party, terminated the open motions, closed the case, and limited the effect of the dismissal and any settlement to the individual parties.