AmTrust North America, Inc. v. Securranty, Inc.

S.D. New York

AmTrust North America, Inc. v. Securranty, Inc.

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided January 21, 2021·No. 1:20-cv-01166·Unknown

Opinion

poc# DATE FILED: 1/21/2021 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK AMTRUSTNORTHAMERICA, Plaintiff, ORDER -V- 20-CV-1166 (DLC) (JLC) SECURRANTY, INC., Defendant.

JAMES L. COTT, United States Magistrate Judge. The Court held a settlement conference today, at which the parties reached a settlement. The parties also agreed to consent to my jurisdiction and requested that the Court retain jurisdiction over this case for enforcement purposes. Accordingly, the parties are directed to file a consent form and a stipulation and order of dismissal or the equivalent providing, inter alia, that the Court retain jurisdiction for enforcement purposes, no later than February 22, 2021. See, e.g., Hendrickson v. United States, 791 F.3d 354, 358 (2d Cir. 2015) (‘[T]o retain ancillary jurisdiction over enforcement of a settlement agreement, . . . a district court’s order of dismissal must either (1) expressly retain jurisdiction over the settlement agreement, or (2) incorporate the terms of the settlement agreement in the order’). SO ORDERED. Dated: January 21, 2021 New York, New York

(“4 L. COTT States Magistrate Judge

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

poc# DATE FILED: 1/21/2021 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK AMTRUSTNORTHAMERICA, Plaintiff, ORDER -V- 20-CV-1166 (DLC) (JLC) SECURRANTY, INC., Defendant.

JAMES L. COTT, United States Magistrate Judge. The Court held a settlement conference today, at which the parties reached a settlement. The parties also agreed to consent to my jurisdiction and requested that the Court retain jurisdiction over this case for enforcement purposes. Accordingly, the parties are directed to file a consent form and a stipulation and order of dismissal or the equivalent providing, inter alia, that the Court retain jurisdiction for enforcement purposes, no later than February 22, 2021. See, e.g., Hendrickson v. United States, 791 F.3d 354, 358 (2d Cir. 2015) (‘[T]o retain ancillary jurisdiction over enforcement of a settlement agreement, . . . a district court’s order of dismissal must either (1) expressly retain jurisdiction over the settlement agreement, or (2) incorporate the terms of the settlement agreement in the order’). SO ORDERED. Dated: January 21, 2021 New York, New York

(“4 L. COTT States Magistrate Judge

AmTrust North America, Inc. v. Securranty, Inc., (S.D.N.Y. 2021).

Pincite

AmTrust North America, Inc. v. Securranty, Inc. (AmTrust North America, Inc. v. Securranty, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related