The following excerpt is from Telian v. Town of Delhi, 17-0410 (2nd Cir. 2018):
did not own the property, he was under no obligation to do so. Id. In return, the parties would "mutually agree to withdraw[] the appeals in the above captioned matters[.]" Id. at 251. "A termination is not favorable to the accused . . . if the charge is withdrawn or the prosecution abandoned pursuant to a compromise with the accused," Rothstein v. Carriere, 373 F.3d 275, 286 (2d Cir. 2004) (internal citation and quotation marks omitted, alteration in original), and that is exactly what occurred here: the Town withdrew its appeal against Telian pursuant to a compromise with him.2
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.