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

Brown v. The Christmas Mouse, Inc.

Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Docket
1:23-cv-01519
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureContract
In one sentence

In Brown v. The Christmas Mouse, Judge Abrams discontinued the settled-in-principle case without costs, allowing restoration within 30 days.

Who this affects

Lamar Brown and The Christmas Mouse, Inc. The case was closed after the court was told it had settled in principle, with a 30-day period to seek restoration and conditions for the court to retain authority to enforce the settlement.

What happened

In Brown v. The Christmas Mouse, Inc., the court was told that the parties had reached a settlement in principle.

The court discontinued the case without requiring either party to pay costs. It allowed either party to ask to restore the case to the court’s docket within 30 days.

Judge Ronnie Abrams directed the Clerk of Court to close the case. Any request to reopen filed after 30 days could be denied on that basis alone. The court also said it would retain authority to enforce a settlement only if the agreement’s terms were made public and approved by the court within that period.

The detailed version

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

Case
Brown v. The Christmas Mouse, Inc. · No. 1:23-cv-01519
Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Date
July 6, 2023

Background

The court stated that it had been informed that the parties had settled the case in principle. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or the settlement’s terms.

Ruling

The court ordered that the action be discontinued without costs to either party and without prejudice to restoring it to the court’s docket if a request to restore the action was made within 30 days. The court further stated that any application to reopen filed after that period could be denied solely because it was late.

The court explained that, if the parties wanted it to retain jurisdiction—the authority to enforce the settlement agreement—the agreement’s terms had to be placed on the public record and approved by the court within the same 30-day period. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case.

Effect

The order ended the case on the court’s docket based on the reported settlement in principle, subject to the stated 30-day restoration and settlement-enforcement conditions. 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.