The proposed settlement filed on Monday was seen by lawyers for the plaintiffs as another repudiation of a city policing policy. It covers at least 900,000 summonses, issued from 2007 to 2015, that were dismissed on grounds of legal insufficiency, which a federal judge later found was “tantamount to a decision that probable cause was presumptively lacking.”

The lawsuit, filed in 2010, alleged that under an unlawful “pattern and practice” enforced by city officials, police officers were told to issue summonses “regardless of whether any crime or violation” had occurred in order to meet a minimum quota requirement — an allegation the city explicitly denied in the proposed deal.

But under the settlement, the city agreed to send out departmentwide notifications to reiterate its policy that quotas and numerical performance goals were banned, that supervisors who put them in place could be subject to disciplinary action and that officers who believed they had been threatened or retaliated against for failing to comply with a quota should notify the department’s Internal Affairs Bureau.

“Quotas for arrests, summonses or stops have never been used by the N.Y.P.D.,” J. Peter Donald, a police spokesman, said in a statement on Monday. “The department measures success based on the prevention and reduction of crime.”

The settlement could be nearly double the $41 million that the city paid to five men in 2014 to resolve the so-called Central Park jogger lawsuit, concerning their overturned convictions in the 1989 beating and rape of a woman. But the amount is less than the $98 million settlement (not including legal fees) reached that same year in a discrimination case against the Fire Department.