Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Nov. 18, 2022

The Estate of Chi Modu v. Complex Media, Inc.

Judge
Valerie Caproni
Docket
1:22-cv-05300
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureContract
In one sentence

In Estate of Chi Modu v. Complex Media, Judge Caproni dismissed the settled case with prejudice and without costs, allowing limited reopening requests.

Who this affects

The Estate of Chi Modu, Complex Media, Inc., and the Doe defendants were affected because the case was closed after the parties reported an agreement in principle; any request to reopen or preserve court authority to enforce the agreement had to be made within 30 days.

What happened

In The Estate of Chi Modu v. Complex Media, Inc., the parties told the court they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues.

Judge Valerie Caproni canceled all scheduled conferences and deadlines, dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs or attorneys’ fees to either party, terminated pending motions, and closed the case.

Judge Caproni allowed the parties 30 days to request reopening for good cause. They could also ask the court to retain authority to enforce their settlement by submitting the agreement and a separate request within that period.

The detailed version

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

Case
The Estate of Chi Modu v. Complex Media, Inc. · No. 1:22-cv-05300
Judge
Valerie Caproni
Date
Nov. 18, 2022

Background

On November 17, 2022, the parties notified the court that they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or provide the terms of the agreement.

Court’s Action

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 court allowed the parties to apply to reopen the case within 30 days. Any such application had to show good cause for keeping the case open despite the settlement. The court also stated that, if the parties wanted it to retain jurisdiction—the authority to enforce the settlement agreement—they had to submit the agreement and request an order expressly retaining jurisdiction within the same 30-day period. The opinion states that requests filed after 30 days or without a showing of good cause could be denied on that basis alone.

Disposition

The case was dismissed with prejudice and without costs, including attorneys’ fees, to either party. The court did not decide the underlying claims on their merits; the dismissal followed the parties’ reported agreement in principle. Judge Valerie Caproni signed the order.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.