Toro v. Barn Furniture Mart, Inc.

Background

Andrew Toro brought this case against Barn Furniture Mart, Inc., on behalf of himself and others similarly situated. On May 19, 2023, the parties notified the court that they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues. The opinion does not provide the agreement’s terms.

Court’s Orders

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 of Court was directed to terminate all open motions and close the case.

The parties were permitted to apply to reopen the case within 30 days. Such an application had to show good cause for keeping the case open in light of the parties’ settlement. The court also stated that, if the parties wanted the court to retain jurisdiction—that is, authority—to enforce their settlement agreement, they had to submit the agreement and request an order expressly retaining that authority within the same 30-day period.

Class-Action Effect

The court directed the Clerk to remove from the caption the language stating that Toro sued individually and on behalf of others similarly situated. Because the parties had not told the court that they intended to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e), which governs certain class-action settlements and dismissals, the court stated that the dismissal and any settlement operated only between Toro and Barn Furniture Mart. They did not bind absent putative class members.

Disposition

Judge Valerie Caproni dismissed Toro v. Barn Furniture Mart, Inc. with prejudice and without costs or attorneys’ fees to either party, closed the case, and clarified that any settlement did not bind absent putative class members.