Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 17, 2022

James v. New York Botanical Garden

Judge
Vyskocil
Docket
1:21-cv-10746
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In James v. New York Botanical Garden, Judge Vyskocil discontinued the case after parties reached a settlement in principle, allowing restoration by November 21, 2022, or dismissal with prejudice afterward.

Who this affects

Shanell James and New York Botanical Garden, the parties to the discontinued case.

What happened

In James v. New York Botanical Garden, Shanell James told the court that the parties had reached a settlement in principle.

The court discontinued the case without costs and allowed either party to ask to restore it to the court’s calendar by November 21, 2022. If no such request was made by then, the dismissal would be with prejudice. The court also adjourned all other dates and deadlines and directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the pending letter motion.

Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil entered the dismissal order on October 17, 2022. The order did not decide the underlying dispute.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
James v. New York Botanical Garden · No. 1:21-cv-10746
Judge
Vyskocil
Date
Oct. 17, 2022

Background

The court received a letter from Shanell James stating that the parties had reached a settlement in principle. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or the settlement’s terms.

Ruling

The court ordered that the case be discontinued without costs to either party and without prejudice to restoring the case to the court’s calendar, provided an application to restore was made by November 21, 2022. If no application was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice.

The court adjourned all other dates and deadlines, including a conference scheduled for October 20, 2022. It also requested that the Clerk of Court terminate the letter motion pending at docket entry 23.

Effect

This order ended the case based on the reported settlement in principle rather than deciding the merits of the dispute.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.