Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 4, 2023

SVP-Singer Holdings, Inc. v. Lindahl

Judge
Vyskocil
Docket
1:23-cv-02373
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureContract
In one sentence

In SVP-Singer Holdings, Inc. v. Lindahl, Judge Vyskocil discontinued the action after a settlement in principle, subject to restoration by May 4, 2023.

Who this affects

SVP-Singer Holdings, Inc. and Carl-Martin Lindahl, the parties to the action.

What happened

In SVP-Singer Holdings, Inc. v. Lindahl, the parties informed the court that they had reached a settlement in principle.

The court discontinued the action without costs to either party and allowed it to be restored if the parties could not put their settlement in writing and applied to restore the case by May 4, 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
SVP-Singer Holdings, Inc. v. Lindahl · No. 1:23-cv-02373
Judge
Vyskocil
Date
Apr. 4, 2023

Background The parties informed the court that they had reached a settlement in principle. The opinion does not describe the underlying 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 the action to the court’s calendar if the parties were unable to memorialize their settlement in writing. Any application to restore the action had to be made by May 4, 2023. The court further ordered that if no application was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice.

Effect The order resolved the case based on the reported settlement process rather than deciding the underlying dispute. It did not disclose whether the parties later completed a written settlement or whether anyone applied to restore the action.

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.