Dawkins v. Copeland et al

Filing 199

ORDER: The Court having been advised that the parties have reached a settlement in principle, it is ORDERED that the above-entitled action be and hereby is discontinued, without costs to either party, subject to reopening should the settlement not be consummated within thirty (30) days of the date hereof. Any application to reopen must be filed within thirty days of this Order; any application to reopen filed thereafter may be denied solely on that basis. Further, the parties are advised th at if they wish the Court to retain jurisdiction in this matter for purposes of enforcing any settlement agreement, they must submit the settlement agreement to the Court within the next thirty (30) days with a request that the agreement be "so ordered" by the Court. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Edgardo Ramos on 8/24/2023) (tg)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK EDWARD C. DAWKINS, Plaintiff, – against – ORDER 17-cv-9926 (ER) TANOYA COPELAND, Defendant. Ramos, D.J.: The Court having been advised that the parties have reached a settlement in principle, it is ORDERED that the above-entitled action be and hereby is discontinued, without costs to either party, subject to reopening should the settlement not be consummated within thirty (30) days of the date hereof. Any application to reopen must be filed within thirty days of this Order; any application to reopen filed thereafter may be denied solely on that basis. Further, the parties are advised that if they wish the Court to retain jurisdiction in this matter for purposes of enforcing any settlement agreement, they must submit the settlement agreement to the Court within the next thirty (30) days with a request that the agreement be “so ordered” by the Court. SO ORDERED. Dated: August 24, 2023 New York, New York _______________________ Edgardo Ramos, U.S.D.J.

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?