Clark v. City of New York
- Analisa Torres
- 1:18-cv-02334
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Clark v. City of New York, Judge Torres denied Abdelrahim’s untimely request to opt out and ordered her included in the settlement.
Eitedal Abdelrahim, the City of New York, the settlement class, and the Settlement Administrator.
What happened
Clark v. City of New York concerns a class-action settlement that the court finally approved in November 2024. Class Counsel later asked the court to address Eitedal Abdelrahim’s request to be excluded from the settlement or, alternatively, included in it.
The City of New York agreed to include Ms. Abdelrahim but opposed allowing her to opt out after the deadline. The court considered the delay, the reason for it, whether she acted honestly, and the possible harm to the parties.
Judge Analisa Torres denied Ms. Abdelrahim’s untimely request to opt out because doing so could expose the City to additional liability. The court directed the Settlement Administrator to include her in the class.
The detailed version
- Clark v. City of New York · No. 1:18-cv-02334
- Analisa Torres
- Mar. 3, 2025
Background
The Court had granted final approval of the parties’ class-action settlement by an order dated November 19, 2024. On February 21, 2025, Class Counsel asked the Court either to exclude Eitedal Abdelrahim from the settlement or to include her based on what Counsel described as a good-faith misunderstanding of their discussions.
The City of New York consented to including Ms. Abdelrahim in the class but opposed allowing her to opt out after the deadline. The Court explained that it has broad authority to supervise the administration and distribution of settlement funds.
Court’s analysis
The Court considered the risk of prejudice, the length and effect of the delay, the reason for the delay and whether it was within Ms. Abdelrahim’s reasonable control, and whether she acted in good faith. The Court found that allowing her to opt out could prejudice the City by exposing it to additional liability. By contrast, including her in the settlement would not prejudice the City because the City would not have to pay more to settle her claims. The Court found that Ms. Abdelrahim acted in good faith but emphasized her fairly extensive delay and the fact that participation in the settlement would compensate her for her injury without prejudicing the City.
Ruling
The Court denied Ms. Abdelrahim’s untimely request to opt out of the class. It directed the Settlement Administrator to include Ms. Abdelrahim in the class. This order addressed administration of the settlement rather than the underlying merits of the claims.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.