Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Sept. 7, 2023

Cromitie v. Wendell August Forge Incorporated

Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Docket
1:23-cv-02072
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureClass Action
In one sentence

Cromitie v. Wendell August Forge, Judge Abrams discontinued the settled action without costs, allowing restoration within 60 days.

Who this affects

Seana Cromitie, the people identified in the caption as similarly situated, and Wendell August Forge Incorporated. The case was closed after the court was informed that it had been settled, subject to the stated 60-day restoration procedure.

What happened

In Cromitie v. Wendell August Forge Incorporated, the court was told that the case had been settled. The opinion does not describe the settlement’s terms.

The court discontinued the action without costs to either party. It allowed either side to ask to restore the case to the court’s docket within 60 days.

Judge Abrams directed the Clerk of Court to close the case. If the parties wanted the court to retain power to enforce the settlement, they had to place its terms on the public record and obtain the court’s approval within the stated period.

The detailed version

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

Case
Cromitie v. Wendell August Forge Incorporated · No. 1:23-cv-02072
Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Date
Sept. 7, 2023

Background

The court stated that it had been informed that the case had been settled. The opinion does not provide the settlement’s terms or explain the underlying claims. The caption identifies Seana Cromitie as bringing the case on behalf of himself and others similarly situated.

Order

The court ordered that the action be discontinued without costs to any party. It allowed the action to be restored to the court’s docket if an application to restore it was made within 60 days of the order. The court warned that an application filed after that period could be denied solely because it was late.

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

Disposition

The action was discontinued without costs, with the possibility of restoration by timely application. The court did not rule on the underlying claims or disclose the settlement terms.

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.