Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 17, 2023

Senior v. The J.G. Wentworth Company, LLC

Judge
Vyskocil
Docket
1:22-cv-09459
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureClass Action
In one sentence

Senior v. J.G. Wentworth: Judge Vyskocil discontinued the action after a settlement in principle, allowing restoration by February 17, 2023.

Who this affects

Frank Senior, the people he sought to represent, and The J.G. Wentworth Company, LLC. The action was discontinued based on the parties’ reported settlement in principle, subject to the stated deadline for seeking restoration.

What happened

In Senior v. The J.G. Wentworth Company, LLC, Frank Senior told the court that the parties had reached a settlement in principle. He brought the action on behalf of himself and other similarly situated people.

The court discontinued the action without costs to either party and without prejudice to restoring it to the court’s calendar if the parties could not put their settlement in writing. Any request to restore the action had to be made by February 17, 2023.

Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil ordered that if no request to restore the action was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice. The opinion did not decide the underlying claims.

The detailed version

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

Case
Senior v. The J.G. Wentworth Company, LLC · No. 1:22-cv-09459
Judge
Vyskocil
Date
Jan. 17, 2023

Background

Frank Senior sued The J.G. Wentworth Company, LLC on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly situated. The opinion states that Senior informed the court that the parties had reached a settlement in principle.

Court’s Action

Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil ordered that the action be discontinued without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring the action to the court’s calendar. Restoration was permitted if the parties were unable to memorialize their settlement in writing, but any application to restore the action had to be made by February 17, 2023.

The order further stated that if no such application was made by February 17, 2023, the dismissal would be with prejudice. The opinion did not address the merits of Senior’s claims or approve the settlement’s 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.