Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 3, 2024

Rauch Industries, Inc. v. Heart Artist LLC

Judge
Vyskocil
Docket
1:22-cv-00909
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureDiscovery
In one sentence

In Rauch Industries v. Heart Artist, Judge Vyskocil discontinued the action after a settlement in principle, subject to restoration by February 2, 2024.

Who this affects

Rauch Industries, Inc., Heart Artist LLC, and Christopher Radko; the order also affected the scheduled discovery hearing.

What happened

In Rauch Industries, Inc. v. Heart Artist LLC and Christopher Radko, the parties told the court they had reached a settlement in principle.

The court discontinued the action without costs to any party and allowed either side to ask to restore it if the parties could not put their settlement in writing, provided that request was made by February 2, 2024.

Judge Vyskocil also adjourned the January 4, 2024 discovery hearing without setting a new date. If no request to restore the action was made by February 2, 2024, the dismissal would be with prejudice.

The detailed version

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

Case
Rauch Industries, Inc. v. Heart Artist LLC · No. 1:22-cv-00909
Judge
Vyskocil
Date
Jan. 3, 2024

Background

The court was advised that Rauch Industries, Inc. and defendants Heart Artist LLC and Christopher Radko 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. Any application to restore the action had to be made by February 2, 2024. The order further stated that if no such application was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice, meaning the action could not be restored.

The court also ordered that the discovery hearing scheduled for January 4, 2024, be adjourned without a new date. The order did not decide the underlying 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.