Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 15, 2023

Roosevelt Parent LLC v. Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc.

Judge
Valerie Caproni
Docket
1:23-cv-01244
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureContract
In one sentence

Judge Caproni dismissed Roosevelt Parent LLC v. Select Portfolio Servicing with prejudice and without costs after the parties reached an agreement in principle.

Who this affects

Roosevelt Parent LLC, Roosevelt Management Company LLC, Rushmore Loan Management Services LLC, Dakota Asset Services LLC, and Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc.

What happened

In Roosevelt Parent LLC v. Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc., the parties told the court that they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues.

The court canceled scheduled conferences and deadlines, dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, terminated all open motions, and closed the case.

Judge Valerie Caproni allowed the parties 30 days to request reopening for good cause and to ask the court to retain authority to enforce their settlement agreement if they submitted the required materials.

The detailed version

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

Case
Roosevelt Parent LLC v. Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. · No. 1:23-cv-01244
Judge
Valerie Caproni
Date
June 15, 2023

Background

On June 14, 2023, the parties notified the court that they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues. The order does not describe the underlying claims or the terms of that agreement.

Ruling

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.

Possible Reopening and Enforcement

The parties could apply to reopen the case within 30 days of the order. Any such application had to show good cause for keeping the case open in light of the settlement, and a late or unsupported request could be denied on that basis. 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. Judge Valerie Caproni issued the order.

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.