Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled May 14, 2024

Castro v. Spinneybeck Enterprises, Inc.

Judge
Vyskocil
Docket
1:23-cv-08519
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureClass Action
In one sentence

In Castro v. Spinneybeck Enterprises, Judge Vyskocil discontinued the action after a settlement in principle, allowing restoration by June 13, 2024, or dismissal with prejudice.

Who this affects

Felix Castro and the other people he sought to represent, as well as Spinneybeck Enterprises, Inc.

What happened

In Castro v. Spinneybeck Enterprises, Inc., Felix Castro told the court that the parties had reached a settlement in principle.

The court discontinued the action without costs to either party and allowed it to be restored if the parties could not put their settlement in writing, provided an application was made by June 13, 2024.

Judge Vyskocil ordered that if no application to restore the action was filed by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice.

The detailed version

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

Case
Castro v. Spinneybeck Enterprises, Inc. · No. 1:23-cv-08519
Judge
Vyskocil
Date
May 14, 2024

Background

Felix Castro, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated, filed the action against Spinneybeck Enterprises, Inc. The court received Castro's letter stating that the parties had reached a settlement in principle. The order does not describe the settlement's terms.

Ruling

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. Any application to restore the action had to be made by June 13, 2024. The court further ordered that if no such application was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice.

Effect

The action was not decided on the underlying claims. Its continuation depended on whether the parties finalized the settlement and, if not, whether a timely application to restore the case was made.

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.