Sookul v. Happy Head, Inc.
- Vyskocil
- 1:24-cv-00291
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Sookul v. Happy Head, Inc., Judge Vyskocil discontinued the case after a settlement in principle, subject to restoration by March 21 or dismissal with prejudice.
Sanjay Sookul, the people he sought to represent, and Happy Head, Inc.
What happened
In Sookul v. Happy Head, Inc., Plaintiff Sanjay Sookul told the court that the parties had reached a settlement in principle.
The court discontinued the case 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 March 21, 2024; otherwise, the dismissal would be with prejudice.
Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil issued the order on February 20, 2024. The order did not decide the underlying claims.
The detailed version
- Sookul v. Happy Head, Inc. · No. 1:24-cv-00291
- Vyskocil
- Feb. 20, 2024
Background
Plaintiff Sanjay Sookul filed the action on behalf of himself and others described as similarly situated. The court received a letter from Sookul stating that the parties 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. Restoration was permitted if the parties were unable to memorialize their settlement in writing, but any application to restore the action had to be made by March 21, 2024. If no application was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice.
The order resolved the case based on the parties’ reported settlement status and did not decide the underlying claims. Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil signed the order.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.