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

Volfman v. 176 7th Avenue Pizza, LTD

Judge
Vyskocil
Docket
1:23-cv-00809
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Joseph Volfman v. Pyramid Effect LLC, Judge Vyskocil dismissed the action after the parties reported a settlement in principle, while allowing restoration by November 6.

Who this affects

Joseph Volfman and the defendants, PYRAMID EFFECT LLC d/b/a TIVOLI TRATTORIA and HUANG’S HOLDING CORP.; the action was discontinued based on the parties’ reported settlement in principle.

What happened

Joseph Volfman told the court that the parties had reached a settlement in principle in Joseph Volfman v. Pyramid Effect LLC d/b/a Tivoli Trattoria and Huang’s Holding Corp.

The court discontinued the action without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring it to the court’s calendar if the parties could not put their settlement in writing. Any request to restore the action had to be made by November 6, 2023. If no request was made by then, the dismissal would be with prejudice.

Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil entered the order on October 6, 2023.

The detailed version

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

Case
Volfman v. 176 7th Avenue Pizza, LTD · No. 1:23-cv-00809
Judge
Vyskocil
Date
Oct. 6, 2023

Background

Joseph Volfman filed a letter informing the court that the parties had reached a settlement in principle. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or the settlement’s terms.

Court’s Action

The court ordered that the action be discontinued without costs to any party. The order stated that the action could be restored to the court’s calendar without prejudice—that is, without permanently barring restoration—if the parties were unable to memorialize their settlement in writing and an application to restore the action was made by November 6, 2023.

The order further stated that if no application to restore the action was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice, meaning the action could not then be restored. The court did not state that the settlement had been finalized.

Disposition

Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil ordered the dismissal on October 6, 2023, subject to the stated deadline and conditions.

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.