Mason v. Nextwave Safety Solutions, Inc.
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:23-cv-08537
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Mason v. Nextwave Safety Solutions, Judge Caproni dismissed the settled case with prejudice and closed it.
Diantha Mason, Nextwave Safety Solutions, Inc., and Adams European Contracting, Inc.; the case was closed after the parties reached an agreement in principle through mediation.
What happened
In Mason v. Nextwave Safety Solutions, Inc., the parties told the court that mediation had produced an agreement in principle resolving all issues. The opinion does not describe the settlement’s terms.
The court canceled all scheduled conferences and other deadlines, terminated all open motions, and closed the case. It ordered that the dismissal was with prejudice and that neither party would receive costs or attorneys’ fees.
Judge Valerie Caproni also allowed the parties to ask to reopen the case within 30 days if they showed good cause. They could ask the court to retain authority to enforce the settlement only by submitting the agreement and a request for that authority within the same 30-day period.
The detailed version
- Mason v. Nextwave Safety Solutions, Inc. · No. 1:23-cv-08537
- Valerie Caproni
- Mar. 12, 2024
Background
Diantha Mason sued Nextwave Safety Solutions, Inc., and Adams European Contracting, Inc. On March 12, 2024, the court was notified that the parties had reached an agreement in principle through mediation resolving all issues. The opinion does not provide the settlement’s terms.
Ruling
The court canceled all previously scheduled conferences and other deadlines. It dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, including attorneys’ fees, to either party. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate all open motions and close the case.
The order allowed the parties to apply to reopen the case within 30 days. Any application had to show good cause for keeping the case open despite the settlement, and a late application or one lacking a showing of good cause could be denied on that basis alone. The court also stated that, if the parties wanted it to retain authority to enforce their settlement agreement, they had to submit the agreement and request an order expressly retaining that authority within the same 30-day period.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.