Hedges v. The Shaw University
- Vyskocil
- 1:20-cv-08714
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Hedges v. Shaw University, Judge Vyskocil discontinued the case after a settlement in principle, allowing restoration by March 1, 2021, otherwise with prejudice.
Donna Hedges and the people she sought to represent, as well as The Shaw University. The case was discontinued, with restoration available by March 1, 2021, and with prejudice if no restoration application was made by that date.
What happened
In Hedges v. The Shaw University, Donna Hedges brought the case on behalf of herself and other similarly situated people. The court received her letter stating that the parties had reached a settlement in principle.
The court discontinued the case without costs to either party. The case could be restored if an application was made by March 1, 2021; otherwise, the dismissal would be with prejudice. The court also postponed all other dates and deadlines indefinitely.
Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil entered the order on January 29, 2021. The opinion does not describe the settlement terms or decide the underlying claims.
The detailed version
- Hedges v. The Shaw University · No. 1:20-cv-08714
- Vyskocil
- Jan. 29, 2021
Background
Donna Hedges sued The Shaw University on behalf of herself and all other persons similarly situated. The opinion states that the court received a letter from Hedges informing it that the parties had reached a settlement in principle.
Ruling
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 an application to restore it was made by March 1, 2021. The order further states that if no application was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice. All other dates and deadlines were postponed indefinitely.
Classification
This is a procedural order because the court discontinued the case based on the reported settlement in principle and did not decide the underlying claims. The opinion does not provide the settlement terms or state that the court approved a final settlement.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.