Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 16, 2023

Velazquez v. Caro Bambino, LLC

Judge
Vyskocil
Docket
1:22-cv-08380
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureClass Action
In one sentence

In Velazquez v. Caro Bambino, Judge Vyskocil discontinued the case after a settlement in principle, allowing restoration by March 16, 2023.

Who this affects

Bryan Velazquez, Caro Bambino, LLC, and the putative group of similarly situated people represented in the action; the case was discontinued subject to the stated deadline and conditions.

What happened

Velazquez v. Caro Bambino, LLC involved Bryan Velazquez’s action on behalf of himself and others similarly situated against Caro Bambino, LLC. The court received a letter stating that the parties had reached a settlement in principle.

The court ordered the action discontinued without costs to any 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 March 16, 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 detailed version

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

Case
Velazquez v. Caro Bambino, LLC · No. 1:22-cv-08380
Judge
Vyskocil
Date
Feb. 16, 2023

Background

Bryan Velazquez brought the action on behalf of himself and others similarly situated against Caro Bambino, LLC. The opinion states that the court received a letter from Caro Bambino informing the court that the parties had reached a settlement in principle.

Ruling

Based on that reported settlement, the court ordered that the action be discontinued without costs to any party. The order allowed either side to seek restoration of the action to the court’s calendar if the parties were unable to memorialize their settlement in writing, provided that the request to restore the action was made by March 16, 2023.

Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil further ordered that if no request to restore the action was made by March 16, 2023, the dismissal would be with prejudice. The order did not address 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.