Hernandez v. Eco Vessel LLC
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:23-cv-06809
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Mairoby Hernandez v. Eco Vessel LLC, Judge Caproni dismissed the case with prejudice after the parties reported an agreement in principle, without costs or attorney fees.
Mairoby Hernandez and Eco Vessel LLC are bound by the dismissal and any settlement. Absent proposed class members are not bound.
What happened
Mairoby Hernandez v. Eco Vessel LLC involved a proposed class case. The parties told the court that they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues.
The court canceled all scheduled conferences and deadlines, ended all pending motions, and closed the case. It dismissed the case with prejudice, meaning the case itself cannot be refiled, and ordered that neither side pay costs or attorney fees. The parties could ask to reopen the case within 30 days by showing good cause. They could also ask the court to keep authority to enforce their settlement by submitting the settlement agreement and a request within that period.
Judge Valerie Caproni ordered the clerk to remove the proposed-class language from the caption. Because the parties had not told the court they intended to follow the required class-settlement procedure, the dismissal and any settlement apply only to Hernandez and Eco Vessel LLC and do not bind absent proposed class members.
The detailed version
- Hernandez v. Eco Vessel LLC · No. 1:23-cv-06809
- Valerie Caproni
- Oct. 9, 2023
Background
The case was brought by Mairoby Hernandez individually and on behalf of others similarly situated against Eco Vessel LLC. On October 5, 2023, the parties notified the court that they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues.
Court’s Orders
The court canceled all previously scheduled conferences and other deadlines. It dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, including attorney fees, to either party. The clerk was directed to terminate all open motions and close the case.
The parties were allowed to apply to reopen the case within 30 days. Any such application had to show good cause for keeping the case open despite the settlement. The court stated that a request filed after 30 days or without a showing of good cause could be denied on that basis alone.
The court also explained that, if the parties wanted it to retain jurisdiction—that is, continuing 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.
Proposed Class
The clerk was directed to delete the words “individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated” from the caption. Because the parties had not notified the court that they intended to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e), which governs court approval and notice for certain class settlements, the dismissal and any settlement were operative only between Hernandez and Eco Vessel LLC. They did not bind absent proposed class members.
Disposition
Judge Valerie Caproni dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, directed that the case be closed, and limited the effect of the dismissal and settlement to the individual plaintiff and defendant.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.