Fagnani v. The Bradford Exchange, Ltd.
- Vyskocil
- 1:22-cv-10926
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Fagnani v. The Bradford Exchange, Ltd., Judge Vyskocil discontinued the action after a settlement in principle, subject to restoration by June 1, 2023.
Mykayla Fagnani, The Bradford Exchange, Ltd., and the action brought on behalf of other similarly situated persons were affected by the order discontinuing the case subject to the stated restoration deadline.
What happened
In Fagnani v. The Bradford Exchange, Ltd., Mykayla Fagnani told the court that she and The Bradford Exchange, Ltd. had reached a settlement in principle. She brought the action on behalf of herself and other similarly situated people.
The court discontinued the action without costs to either party and without prejudice to restoring it if the parties could not put their settlement in writing. Any request to restore the action had to be made by June 1, 2023. If no such request was made by then, the dismissal would be with prejudice.
Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil entered the order on May 1, 2023. The opinion does not decide the underlying claims.
The detailed version
- Fagnani v. The Bradford Exchange, Ltd. · No. 1:22-cv-10926
- Vyskocil
- May 1, 2023
Background
Mykayla Fagnani brought this action on behalf of herself and all other persons similarly situated against The Bradford Exchange, Ltd. The court received a letter from Fagnani stating 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 June 1, 2023. The order further states that, if no such application was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice.
The opinion does not resolve the underlying claims or state the settlement’s terms. The portion of the order stating the consequence of failing to apply for restoration contains garbled text, but its apparent meaning is that no timely restoration application would result in dismissal with prejudice.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.