Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 29, 2024

Volfman v. Winnie's NYC LLC

Judge
Paul Engelmayer
Docket
1:24-cv-00264
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureDiscovery
In one sentence

In Volfman v. Winnie's NYC LLC, Judge Tarnofsky ordered settlement discussions and a joint status letter before further case steps.

Who this affects

Joseph Volfman and the defendants in the case, including Winnie’s NYC LLC doing business as Dr. Clark, must follow the settlement-discussion and joint-letter deadlines.

What happened

In Volfman v. Winnie's NYC LLC, the court ordered the parties to try to settle the case after the complaint and summons are served. The order did not decide whether the plaintiff has standing, but directed the parties to discuss that issue during settlement talks.

Within 30 days after service, the parties must meet for at least one hour and make a good-faith effort to settle. Within 45 days after service, they must send a joint letter stating whether they settled. If they did not, the letter must ask the court to choose mediation, a settlement conference, or an initial case-management conference.

Robyn F. Tarnofsky, the United States magistrate judge who signed the order, issued these requirements on January 29, 2024. The order did not rule on the claims or defenses in the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Volfman v. Winnie's NYC LLC · No. 1:24-cv-00264
Judge
Paul Engelmayer
Date
Jan. 29, 2024

Order

The court ordered Joseph Volfman and the defendants, including Winnie’s NYC LLC doing business as Dr. Clark, to meet and confer—meaning to discuss the case directly—in a good-faith effort to settle the action.

Deadlines and required discussions

The parties must meet for at least one hour within 30 days after service of the summons and complaint. During those discussions, they must consider whether the plaintiff has met the threshold requirement of standing, which concerns whether he is entitled to bring the case in federal court. The order cited Calcano v. Swarovski N. Am. Ltd. and Harty v. W. Point Realty, Inc. in connection with that issue. The order did not decide whether standing exists.

If the parties cannot settle on their own, they must also discuss whether additional settlement discussions through the court’s mediation program or before the magistrate judge would be productive at that time.

Joint letter

Within 45 days after service of the summons and complaint, the parties must submit a joint letter telling the court whether they settled. If they did not settle, the letter must request one of three next steps: referral to mediation, a date for a settlement conference, or an initial case-management conference.

Disposition

This is a case-management and settlement order. It does not decide the merits of the claims, dismiss any claim, or resolve the standing issue.

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.