Niram, Inc. v. Sterling National Bank
- Vyskocil
- 1:21-cv-05966
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
Niram v. Sterling National Bank was discontinued after settlement discussions, and Judge Vyskocil denied Sterling’s pending motion as moot.
Niram, Inc. and Sterling National Bank; the case was discontinued subject to the stated deadline for restoring it.
What happened
In Niram, Inc. v. Sterling National Bank, the parties told the court they had reached a settlement in principle and asked to pause the case and its deadlines.
The court discontinued the case without costs and allowed either party to seek restoration by May 4, 2024, if the settlement was not put in writing. If no application was made by then, the dismissal would be with prejudice.
Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil also denied Sterling’s pending motion as moot, without prejudice to refiling if the case was restored.
The detailed version
- Niram, Inc. v. Sterling National Bank · No. 1:21-cv-05966
- Vyskocil
- Apr. 4, 2024
Background The parties informed the court that they had reached a settlement in principle. They asked the court to hold Sterling National Bank’s pending motion in abeyance and stay, or pause, the remaining case deadlines.
Ruling The court ordered that the action be discontinued without costs to either party and without prejudice to restoring it to the court’s calendar if the parties could not put their settlement in writing. Any application to restore the action had to be made by May 4, 2024. The order stated that if no application was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice.
The court also denied Sterling National Bank’s pending motion as moot, without prejudice to refiling if the parties restored the action. The opinion does not identify the type or substance of that motion.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.