Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 20, 2023

De Angelis USA Corp. v. Savino Del Bene U.S.A. Inc.

Judge
Valerie Caproni
Docket
1:22-cv-08990
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureContract
In one sentence

In De Angelis USA Corp. v. Savino Del Bene U.S.A. Inc., Judge Caproni dismissed the settled case with prejudice and without costs.

Who this affects

De Angelis USA Corp., Savino Del Bene U.S.A. Inc., and Sunteck Transport Co LLC; the case was closed after the parties reported an agreement in principle.

What happened

In De Angelis USA Corp. v. Savino Del Bene U.S.A. Inc., the court was notified that the parties had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or the settlement’s terms.

The court canceled all scheduled conferences and other deadlines. It also directed the clerk to terminate all open motions and close the case.

Judge Valerie Caproni dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, including attorneys’ fees, to either party. The parties could ask to reopen the case within 30 days by showing good cause; they could also ask the court to retain jurisdiction to enforce their settlement by submitting the agreement and a separate request within that period.

The detailed version

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

Case
De Angelis USA Corp. v. Savino Del Bene U.S.A. Inc. · No. 1:22-cv-08990
Judge
Valerie Caproni
Date
Apr. 20, 2023

Background

On April 18, 2023, the court was notified through mediation that De Angelis USA Corp., Savino Del Bene U.S.A. Inc., and Sunteck Transport Co LLC had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues. The opinion does not provide the underlying claims or the terms of the agreement.

Court’s Action

The court canceled all previously scheduled conferences and other deadlines. It dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, including attorneys’ fees, to either party. The clerk was directed to terminate all open motions and close the case.

The order allowed the parties to apply within 30 days to reopen the case. Such an application had to show good cause for keeping the case open despite the parties’ settlement. The order also stated that, if the parties wanted the court to retain jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement, they had to submit the agreement and a request for an order expressly retaining jurisdiction within the same 30-day period.

Disposition

Judge Valerie Caproni dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs to either party, terminated the open motions, and directed that the case be closed.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.