Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Sept. 26, 2025

Rada v. Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC

Full caption

Kathy Frazier, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, O. Adepoju-Grace, and Aisha Rada v. Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC, Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC, and Morgan Stanley

Judge
Richard Sullivan
Docket
1:16-cv-00804
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureArbitration
In one sentence

In Frazier v. Morgan Stanley, Judge Sullivan dismissed Frazier’s and Adepoju-Grace’s settled claims with prejudice and required an update on Rada’s arbitration.

Who this affects

Kathy Frazier and O. Adepoju-Grace’s claims were dismissed with prejudice after settlement. Aisha Rada’s claims remained subject to arbitration, and the parties were required to report on that arbitration and propose how to proceed.

What happened

Kathy Frazier, O. Adepoju-Grace, and Aisha Rada v. Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC, Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC, and Morgan Stanley concerns claims brought against the Morgan Stanley defendants.

The court said Frazier and Adepoju-Grace had reached a settlement with the defendants. It dismissed their claims in their entirety with prejudice and without costs, ended the action as to them, and retained authority to enforce the settlement.

Aisha Rada was the only remaining plaintiff because the court had previously ordered arbitration of her claims. Judge Richard J. Sullivan ordered the parties to submit a joint letter by October 10, 2025, reporting on the arbitration and explaining how they wished to proceed.

The detailed version

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

Case
Rada v. Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC · No. 1:16-cv-00804
Judge
Richard Sullivan
Date
Sept. 26, 2025

Settlement and Dismissal

The parties informed the court that Plaintiffs Kathy Frazier and O. Emmanuel Adepoju-Grace had reached a settlement with the defendants. The court ordered that Ms. Frazier’s and Mr. Adepoju-Grace’s claims be dismissed in their entirety with prejudice and without costs. A dismissal with prejudice bars those claims from being brought again. The court also retained jurisdiction, meaning authority, to enforce the settlement agreement and directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the action as to those two plaintiffs.

Aisha Rada’s Claims

The court noted that it had previously granted the defendants’ motions to compel arbitration of Aisha Rada’s claims. Because Ms. Rada was the only remaining plaintiff, the court ordered the parties to submit a joint letter by October 10, 2025, stating the status of the arbitration and how they wished to proceed regarding her claims.

Disposition

The order dismissed Frazier’s and Adepoju-Grace’s claims in their entirety with prejudice and without costs, while retaining jurisdiction to enforce their settlement. It did not state a final disposition of Rada’s claims; instead, it required a status update about arbitration. Judge Richard J. Sullivan, a United States Circuit Judge sitting by designation, issued the order.

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.