Vuppala v. Enterprise 38 LLC
- Ronnie Abrams
- 1:22-cv-09957
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
Judge Abrams discontinued Vuppala v. Enterprise 38 LLC after the parties reported settling, without costs and without prejudice to timely restoration.
The parties to the settled action—Kiran Vuppala, Enterprise 38 LLC doing business as Enterprise Parking, and Midtown West B L.L.C.—were affected. The case was closed, subject to a possible application to restore it within 30 days.
What happened
In Vuppala v. Enterprise 38 LLC, the court was told that the parties had settled the case.
The court discontinued the action without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring it to the court’s docket if an application was made within 30 days. The court also directed the Clerk of Court to close the case.
Judge Ronnie Abrams stated that any request to reopen the case filed after 30 days could be denied on that basis alone. The court could retain jurisdiction to enforce the settlement only if the agreement’s terms were placed on the public record and approved by the court within the same 30-day period.
The detailed version
- Vuppala v. Enterprise 38 LLC · No. 1:22-cv-09957
- Ronnie Abrams
- May 26, 2023
Background
The opinion states that the court was informed that the case had been settled. It does not describe the underlying claims or the settlement’s terms.
Court’s action
Judge Ronnie Abrams ordered that the action be discontinued without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring the action to the court’s docket if an application to restore it was made within 30 days. The order states that any application to reopen filed after that period could be denied solely because it was late. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case.
Settlement enforcement
The court stated that it would retain jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement only if the agreement’s terms were placed on the public record and approved by the court within the same 30-day period. The opinion cites Hendrickson v. United States, 791 F.3d 354, 358 (2d Cir. 2015).
Disposition
The action was discontinued without costs and without prejudice to timely restoration. The order did not decide the merits of the parties’ underlying dispute.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.