Young v. MVW Holdings, Inc.
- Vyskocil
- 1:23-cv-03906
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Young v. MVW Holdings, Judge Vyskocil discontinued the action after a settlement in principle, with dismissal becoming with prejudice absent restoration by November 17, 2023.
Leshawn Young, the persons she sought to represent, and MVW Holdings, Inc.; the action was discontinued subject to possible restoration by November 17, 2023, after which the dismissal would be with prejudice.
What happened
Young v. MVW Holdings, Inc. was an action brought by Leshawn Young on behalf of herself and other similarly situated persons. The defendant informed the court that the parties had reached a settlement in principle.
The court discontinued the action without costs to either party and without prejudice to restoring it to the court’s calendar if the parties could not put their settlement in writing. Any application to restore the action had to be made by November 17, 2023. If no application was made by then, the dismissal would be with prejudice.
Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil entered the order of dismissal on October 6, 2023.
The detailed version
- Young v. MVW Holdings, Inc. · No. 1:23-cv-03906
- Vyskocil
- Oct. 6, 2023
Background
The caption identifies Leshawn Young as the plaintiff, bringing the action on behalf of herself and other similarly situated persons, and MVW Holdings, Inc. as the defendant. The court received a letter from the defendant stating that the parties had reached a settlement in principle.
Ruling
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. An application to restore the action had to be made by November 17, 2023. The order stated that if no application was made by that date, the dismissal of the action would be with prejudice.
Effect
The opinion does not describe the underlying claims, the settlement’s terms, or whether the settlement was ultimately put in writing. The order addresses the action’s dismissal following the reported settlement in principle and does not decide the underlying merits.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.