Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Dec. 2, 2022

Jeronimo v. Disfruta Products, LLC

Judge
Lorna Schofield
Docket
1:22-cv-04166
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureContract
In one sentence

In Jeronimo v. Disfruta Products, Judge Schofield dismissed the settled action with prejudice and declined jurisdiction to enforce the settlement.

Who this affects

Leocadia Jeronimo and Disfruta Products, LLC, along with the other defendants named in the action, are affected by the dismissal and the court’s decision not to retain jurisdiction to enforce the settlement.

What happened

In Jeronimo v. Disfruta Products, LLC, the parties asked the court to approve their proposed settlement. The court had already found the settlement fair and reasonable based on the claims, litigation risks, and potential expenses.

The parties then asked the court to clarify that the case would be dismissed with prejudice, meaning it could not be brought again, or alternatively to reopen the case.

Judge Schofield dismissed the entire action with prejudice, awarded no attorney’s fees or costs, and declined to keep jurisdiction to enforce the settlement. The parties were directed to the appropriate forum if one of them later claimed the settlement had been breached.

The detailed version

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

Case
Jeronimo v. Disfruta Products, LLC · No. 1:22-cv-04166
Judge
Lorna Schofield
Date
Dec. 2, 2022

Background

On November 18, 2022, the parties jointly moved for approval of a proposed settlement. On November 22, 2022, the court approved the settlement as fair and reasonable, considering the nature and scope of the plaintiff’s claims and the risks and expenses of continued litigation.

On December 1, 2022, the parties jointly asked the court to amend its earlier order to clarify that the case was dismissed with prejudice, as they had contemplated, or alternatively to reopen the case.

Ruling

The court ordered that the action be dismissed, with prejudice, in its entirety. It also ordered that there would be no award of attorney’s fees or costs. The court declined to retain jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement and directed the parties to the appropriate forum if the agreement were breached.

Classification

This is a procedural order because the court resolved the case following settlement and addressed dismissal and enforcement jurisdiction rather than deciding the underlying claims.

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.