Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 1, 2024

Qosaj v. Gazi Realty LLC

Judge
Katharine Parker
Docket
1:23-cv-07048
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Qosaj v. Gazi Realty LLC, Judge Vyskocil discontinued the action after settlement in principle, allowing restoration by April 1 before dismissal becomes with prejudice.

Who this affects

Agim Qosaj, Gazi Realty LLC, Gazivoda Management LLC, and the status of the action. The case was discontinued without costs, with a limited opportunity for restoration; absent a timely application, the dismissal would be with prejudice.

What happened

In Qosaj v. Gazi Realty LLC, Agim Qosaj sued Gazi Realty LLC and Gazivoda Management LLC. The court received a mediator’s report stating that the parties had reached a settlement in principle.

The opinion does not describe the settlement’s terms. The parties still needed to put their agreement in writing.

Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil ordered that the action be discontinued without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring it if the parties could not complete a written settlement, provided they applied to restore the case by April 1, 2024. If no timely application was made, the dismissal would be with prejudice.

The detailed version

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

Case
Qosaj v. Gazi Realty LLC · No. 1:23-cv-07048
Judge
Katharine Parker
Date
Mar. 1, 2024

Background

The court received a report from the mediator stating that the parties had reached a settlement in principle. The opinion identifies the plaintiff as Agim Qosaj and the defendants as Gazi Realty LLC and Gazivoda Management LLC. It does not state the settlement’s terms or indicate that the parties had completed a written settlement agreement.

Ruling

The court ordered that the action be discontinued without costs to any party. The order allowed the parties to restore the action to the court’s calendar if they were unable to memorialize their settlement in writing, but only if an application to restore the action was made by April 1, 2024. If no application was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice. The opinion does 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.