Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 27, 2020

Scott v. Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc.

Judge
Andrew Carter
Docket
1:12-cv-08333
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Class ActionCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Scott v. Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc., Judge Carter ordered supplemental briefing on decertifying the collective action.

Who this affects

The plaintiffs, the proposed collective-action members, and Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc., because the parties were ordered to provide additional briefing on possible decertification.

What happened

Scott v. Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc. involves plaintiffs suing Chipotle on behalf of themselves and others in a collective action.

The court ordered both sides to submit additional written arguments about whether the collective action should be decertified, in light of an earlier Second Circuit opinion in this case.

Judge Carter set May 22, 2020, for the supplemental briefs and June 5, 2020, for replies; he did not decide decertification in this order.

The detailed version

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

Case
Scott v. Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc. · No. 1:12-cv-08333
Judge
Andrew Carter
Date
Apr. 27, 2020

Background

Maxcimo Scott, Jay Ensor, and other plaintiffs brought the case against Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc. on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated. The opinion concerns whether the collective action should be decertified, meaning that the group proceeding should no longer continue in its collective form.

Order

The court ordered the parties to submit supplemental briefing on decertification in light of an earlier Second Circuit opinion in this case. Each party’s supplemental brief was due by May 22, 2020. Each party could file a reply by June 5, 2020.

Disposition

Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. issued a briefing order only. The order did not decide whether to decertify the collective action.

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.