Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 13, 2023

DiMeglio v. Cardillo, Inc.

Judge
Vyskocil
Docket
1:23-cv-07433
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureContract
In one sentence

In DiMeglio v. Cardillo, Inc., Judge Vyskocil discontinued the action after a settlement in principle, allowing restoration by November 13, 2023.

Who this affects

Maria DiMeglio and Cardillo, Inc.; the action was discontinued, subject to a possible restoration request by November 13, 2023, after which the order states the dismissal would be with prejudice.

What happened

Maria DiMeglio told the court that she and Cardillo, Inc. had reached a settlement in principle in this proposed group case. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or settlement terms.

The court discontinued the action without costs to either party and without prejudice to restoring it if the parties could not put their settlement in writing. Any request to restore the case had to be made by November 13, 2023.

Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil ordered that if no restoration request was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice, meaning the action could not be restored under that order.

The detailed version

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

Case
DiMeglio v. Cardillo, Inc. · No. 1:23-cv-07433
Judge
Vyskocil
Date
Oct. 13, 2023

Background

The court received a letter from Plaintiff Maria DiMeglio stating that the parties had reached a settlement in principle. The opinion identifies DiMeglio as proceeding on behalf of herself and others similarly situated, but it does not describe the claims, the proposed group, or the settlement terms.

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. The application to restore the action had to be made by November 13, 2023. The order further stated that if no application was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice. The court cited Muze, Inc. v. Digital On Demand, Inc. for this procedure.

Classification

This is a procedural order because the court discontinued the action based on the parties' reported settlement rather than deciding the underlying legal 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.