Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Dec. 26, 2022

Dicks v. Grendene Global Brands USA, LLC

Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Docket
1:22-cv-06866
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureClass Action
In one sentence

In Dicks v. Grendene Global Brands USA, LLC, Judge Abrams discontinued the settled-in-principle case without prejudice to timely restoration.

Who this affects

Victoria Dicks, the people she sought to represent, and Grendene Global Brands USA, LLC, because the action was closed subject to a 30-day procedure for restoration or court approval of retained settlement-enforcement authority.

What happened

Dicks v. Grendene Global Brands USA, LLC involved Victoria Dicks suing Grendene Global Brands USA, LLC on behalf of herself and others similarly situated. The court was told that the case had been settled in principle.

The court discontinued the action without costs to either party. The case could be restored to the court’s docket if an application was made within 30 days, and the clerk was directed to close the case.

Judge Ronnie Abrams also stated that any request for the court to retain authority to enforce a settlement had to be placed on the public record and approved by the court within the same 30-day period.

The detailed version

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

Case
Dicks v. Grendene Global Brands USA, LLC · No. 1:22-cv-06866
Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Date
Dec. 26, 2022

Background

Victoria Dicks brought the action against Grendene Global Brands USA, LLC on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated. The court stated that it had been informed that the case had been settled in principle. The order does not describe the claims or the settlement’s terms.

Ruling

The court ordered that the action be discontinued without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring it to the court’s docket if an application to restore the action was made within 30 days. It further stated that an application to reopen filed after that period could be denied solely because it was late. The clerk was directed to close the case.

The court also stated that, if the parties wanted the court to retain jurisdiction—the authority to enforce a 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 order did not decide the underlying claims or approve specific settlement terms.

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.