Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 12, 2024

Wolf v. Linda London Ltd.

Judge
Lorna Schofield
Docket
1:23-cv-10905
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureContract
In one sentence

In Wolf v. Linda London Ltd., Judge Schofield required settlement materials and denied pending motions as moot after the parties reached an agreement in principle.

Who this affects

Karin Wolf, Linda London Ltd., and the other defendants in the case; the order also affected any pending motions, conferences, and deadlines.

What happened

In Wolf v. Linda London Ltd., the parties informed the court that they had reached a settlement agreement in principle.

The court ordered the parties to submit the settlement agreement and a joint letter with evidence addressing whether the proposed settlement was fair and reasonable by April 2, 2024.

Judge Lorna G. Schofield also denied any pending motions as moot and canceled all conferences and deadlines. The order does not say whether the settlement was later approved.

The detailed version

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

Case
Wolf v. Linda London Ltd. · No. 1:23-cv-10905
Judge
Lorna Schofield
Date
Mar. 12, 2024

Background

On March 12, 2024, the court was informed that the parties had reached a settlement agreement in principle. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or the settlement's terms.

Court’s Order

The court ordered the parties to submit the settlement agreement by April 2, 2024. It also ordered them to submit a joint letter with supporting evidence addressing the findings needed for the court to approve the settlement as fair and reasonable.

The court further ordered that any pending motions were denied as moot, meaning the settlement discussions made those motions no longer necessary to decide. The court also canceled all conferences and deadlines.

Result

Judge Lorna G. Schofield entered a procedural order requiring materials for review of the proposed settlement, denying pending motions as moot, and canceling conferences and deadlines. The opinion does not state whether the court ultimately approved the settlement.

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.