Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 26, 2024

Grogan v. New York University

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:20-cv-03345
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Grogan v. New York University, Judge Swain referred settlement motions for a report and recommendation without deciding whether the settlement should be enforced.

Who this affects

The order affects Jared J. Grogan and New York University in Abu Dhabi Corporation and New York University by directing how the settlement-related motions will be considered.

What happened

In Grogan v. New York University, the defendants asked the court to enforce a settlement after plaintiff Jared J. Grogan did not oppose their motion. Magistrate Judge Wang denied that motion on January 10, 2024, and the case was reopened.

The defendants then asked for reconsideration, arguing that Judge Wang lacked authority to decide the motion or had overlooked controlling law. They also asked to pause discovery while the settlement dispute was considered.

Judge Swain did not decide those requests. Instead, the court referred the motions as dispositive matters and asked Judge Wang to issue a report and recommendation about how the settlement-enforcement motion should be resolved.

The detailed version

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

Case
Grogan v. New York University · No. 1:20-cv-03345
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Jan. 26, 2024

Background

New York University in Abu Dhabi Corporation and New York University moved to enforce a settlement on September 15, 2023. They certified that they served the motion on pro se plaintiff Jared J. Grogan by verified email and FedEx. Grogan did not oppose the motion.

On January 10, 2024, Magistrate Judge Wang denied the motion to enforce the settlement. The case was then reopened. The defendants moved for reconsideration, arguing that Judge Wang’s order exceeded her authority and, alternatively, that it overlooked controlling legal authority. They also asked the court to stay, or pause, discovery while the settlement-enforcement motion was adjudicated.

Court’s action

The court explained that substantial authority in the Southern District of New York treats a motion to enforce a settlement as either a dispositive motion or the functional equivalent of one. A dispositive motion is one that can resolve a claim or case. Because of that characterization, the court entered a reference for dispositive motions and asked Judge Wang to address the enforcement and reconsideration motions in a report and recommendation concerning the disposition of the settlement-enforcement motion.

This order did not decide whether the settlement should be enforced, whether reconsideration should be granted, or whether discovery should be stayed.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.