Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 12, 2024

The Annuity v. Casabella Contracting of NY

Full caption

The Annuity, Pension, Welfare, Training and Labor Management Cooperation Trust Funds of the International Union of Operating Engineers Local 14-14B, AFL-CIO v. Casabella Contracting of NY, Inc.

Judge
Philip Halpern
Docket
7:21-cv-09532
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureBankruptcy
In one sentence

In Trust Funds v. Casabella, Judge Halpern administratively closed the case without prejudice while bankruptcy proceedings and an automatic stay continue.

Who this affects

The plaintiffs, Casabella Contracting of NY, Inc., and the court proceedings were affected: the case was administratively closed, and all scheduled conferences and other court appearances were canceled.

What happened

The Annuity, Pension, Welfare, Training and Labor Management Cooperation Trust Funds of the International Union of Operating Engineers Local 14-14B, AFL-CIO v. Casabella Contracting of NY, Inc. was paused while a bankruptcy proceeding continued. The court had previously asked the parties to explain why the stayed case should remain active, but neither side filed the requested letter or otherwise contacted the court.

The court ordered the clerk to administratively close the case. Either party may ask to reopen it by letter within 30 days after the bankruptcy proceeding ends or the automatic stay is otherwise lifted. Administrative closure did not end the parties’ ability to seek reopening under that order.

Judge Philip M. Halpern also canceled all conferences and other scheduled court appearances. The order did not decide the underlying dispute.

The detailed version

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

Case
The Annuity v. Casabella Contracting of NY · No. 7:21-cv-09532
Judge
Philip Halpern
Date
Jan. 12, 2024

Background

On December 22, 2023, the court issued an order stating that the case would be administratively closed without prejudice to reopening within 30 days after the bankruptcy proceeding concluded. The parties could avoid that closure by filing, by January 5, 2024, a letter explaining why the stayed case should remain open and active. The parties did not file the letter or otherwise communicate with the court.

Ruling

The court ordered the clerk to administratively close the case, without prejudice to either party moving by letter to reopen it within 30 days after the conclusion of the bankruptcy proceeding or another lifting of the automatic stay. Administrative closure is a docket-management measure; the opinion’s footnote describes its effect as the same as a stay and states that marking a case closed for administrative or statistical convenience has no jurisdictional significance. The court canceled all conferences and other scheduled court appearances.

Effect

This order did not resolve the parties’ underlying dispute. It addressed the case’s status on the docket while the bankruptcy proceeding and automatic stay remained relevant, and it preserved the stated procedure for seeking reopening.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.