Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 6, 2023

Cromitie v. Moore's Sewing

Judge
Vyskocil
Docket
1:23-cv-02320
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureClass Action
In one sentence

Cromitie v. Moore's Sewing ended after Judge Vyskocil dismissed the action following the parties’ settlement in principle.

Who this affects

Seana Cromitie and the others she sought to represent, as well as Moorb’s Sewing, were affected by the court’s conditional dismissal of the action.

What happened

In Cromitie v. Moore's Sewing, the parties told the court that they had reached a settlement in principle. The opinion does not describe the claims or settlement terms.

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 case had to be made by July 21, 2023.

Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil ordered that if no restoration request was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice, meaning the action could not be reopened under that order.

The detailed version

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

Case
Cromitie v. Moore's Sewing · No. 1:23-cv-02320
Judge
Vyskocil
Date
June 6, 2023

Background

Seana Cromitie brought the action on behalf of herself and others similarly situated. The court received a letter from the parties stating that they had reached a settlement in principle. The opinion does not provide the underlying claims or the settlement’s terms.

Court’s action

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 July 21, 2023.

Result

Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil further ordered that if no application to restore the action was made by July 21, 2023, the dismissal would be with prejudice. The order did not decide the underlying claims.

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.