Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 18, 2025

Herrera v. Colorado Christian University

Judge
Vyskocil
Docket
1:25-cv-02611
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureClass Action
In one sentence

In Herrera v. Colorado Christian University, Judge Vyskocil discontinued the case without costs; absent timely restoration, dismissal becomes with prejudice.

Who this affects

Edery Herrera, Colorado Christian University, and the other parties to the action; the caption also refers to people similarly situated to Herrera.

What happened

In Herrera v. Colorado Christian University, the parties informed the court that they had reached a settlement in principle to resolve the case.

The court discontinued the action without costs to any party. It allowed the parties to seek restoration of the case if they could not put their settlement in writing, but any request had to be made by September 17, 2025.

Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil ordered that if no timely restoration request is made, the dismissal will be with prejudice. The opinion does not decide the underlying claims.

The detailed version

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

Case
Herrera v. Colorado Christian University · No. 1:25-cv-02611
Judge
Vyskocil
Date
Aug. 18, 2025

Background The plaintiff, Edery Herrera, brought the action on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated against Colorado Christian University. The opinion states that the defendant filed a letter on behalf of all parties reporting that they had reached a settlement in principle.

Court’s Action The court ordered that the action be discontinued without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring the action to the court’s calendar if the parties were unable to memorialize their settlement in writing. Any application to restore the action had to be made by September 17, 2025.

The court further ordered that if no application to restore the action was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice. The opinion does not address the merits of the underlying claims or describe the settlement’s terms.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.