Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 5, 2021

Hedges v. Anna Maria College

Judge
Valerie Caproni
Docket
1:20-cv-08636
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureClass Action
In one sentence

In Hedges v. Anna Maria College, Judge Caproni dismissed the settled case with prejudice and without costs.

Who this affects

Donna Hedges and Anna Maria College, whose case was dismissed and closed; the order does not state the settlement’s effect on other persons similarly situated.

What happened

Hedges v. Anna Maria College was a case brought by Donna Hedges against Anna Maria College. The parties told the court that they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues.

The court cancelled all scheduled conferences and deadlines. It also directed the clerk to terminate open motions and close the case.

Judge Valerie Caproni dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, including attorneys’ fees. The parties could ask to reopen the case within 30 days by showing good cause, and they could ask the court to retain authority to enforce their settlement by submitting the agreement and a request within that period.

The detailed version

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

Case
Hedges v. Anna Maria College · No. 1:20-cv-08636
Judge
Valerie Caproni
Date
Jan. 5, 2021

Background

Donna Hedges brought the case against Anna Maria College on behalf of herself and all other persons similarly situated. On December 31, 2020, the parties notified the court that they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues. The opinion does not describe the settlement’s terms.

Court’s Action

The court cancelled all previously scheduled conferences and other deadlines. It dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, including attorneys’ fees, to either party. The clerk was directed to terminate all open motions and close the case.

The order allowed the parties to apply to reopen the case within 30 days. Such an application had to show good cause for keeping the case open in light of the settlement, and a request filed after 30 days or without a showing of good cause could be denied on that basis alone. The order also stated that, if the parties wanted the court to retain jurisdiction—meaning authority—to enforce the settlement, they had to submit the settlement agreement and request an order expressly retaining jurisdiction within the same 30-day period.

Classification

This is a procedural order because the court closed the case based on the parties’ settlement without deciding the underlying claims.

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.