Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 27, 2023

Rowe v. Anthem Blue Cross Life and Health Insurance Company

Full caption

Norman Maurice Rowe, M.D., M.H.A., L.L.C. v. Anthem Blue Cross Life and Health Insurance Company

Judge
Vyskocil
Docket
1:22-cv-09518
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureContract
In one sentence

In Norman Maurice Rowe v. Anthem Blue Cross, Judge Vyskocil discontinued the case after a settlement in principle, subject to possible restoration.

Who this affects

Norman Maurice Rowe, M.D., M.H.A., L.L.C., East Coast Plastic Surgery, P.C., and Anthem Blue Cross Life and Health Insurance Company; the case was discontinued subject to the stated restoration deadline.

What happened

Norman Maurice Rowe, M.D., M.H.A., L.L.C. and East Coast Plastic Surgery, P.C. sued Anthem Blue Cross Life and Health Insurance Company. The opinion says the parties reached a settlement in principle.

The court discontinued the case without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring it if the parties could not put their settlement in writing. Any request to restore the case had to be made by April 27, 2023.

Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil ordered that if no restoration request 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
Rowe v. Anthem Blue Cross Life and Health Insurance Company · No. 1:22-cv-09518
Judge
Vyskocil
Date
Mar. 27, 2023

Background

The plaintiffs brought this action against Anthem Blue Cross Life and Health Insurance Company. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims. Anthem informed the court by letter that the parties had reached a settlement in principle.

Ruling

The court ordered that the action be discontinued without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring the action to the court’s calendar if the parties were unable to memorialize their settlement in writing. The court required any application to restore the action to be made by April 27, 2023. If no such application was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice. Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil issued the order.

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.