B.S. v. New York City Department Of Education
- Vyskocil
- 1:23-cv-06815
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In B.S. v. New York City Department of Education, Judge Vyskocil discontinued the action after a settlement in principle, subject to restoration by April 4, 2024.
B.S. and the other plaintiffs, and the New York City Department of Education; the action was discontinued based on a settlement in principle, subject to the stated restoration deadline.
What happened
B.S. v. New York City Department of Education concerns a letter from the defendant stating that the parties had reached a settlement in principle. The opinion does not describe the claims or the proposed settlement’s terms.
The court discontinued the action without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring it if the parties could not put their settlement in writing. Any request to restore the action had to be made by April 4, 2024. If no request was made by then, the dismissal would be with prejudice. The court also postponed all other deadlines indefinitely.
Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil entered the order on March 4, 2024.
The detailed version
- B.S. v. New York City Department Of Education · No. 1:23-cv-06815
- Vyskocil
- Mar. 4, 2024
Background
The defendant filed a letter stating that the parties had reached a settlement in principle. The opinion does not provide the underlying claims or the terms of the proposed settlement.
Court’s Action
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. The court required any application to restore the action to be made by April 4, 2024. If no application was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice. The court postponed all other deadlines indefinitely.
Disposition
Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil entered the order of dismissal. The order did not decide the underlying claims on their merits.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.