Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 15, 2021

Waxler v. Equifax Information Services, LLC

Judge
Valerie Caproni
Docket
1:20-cv-09107
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureContract
In one sentence

In Waxler v. Equifax, Judge Caproni dismissed the settled case with prejudice, while allowing a 30-day application to reopen for good cause.

Who this affects

Zacharia Waxler and defendants Equifax Information Services, LLC, Tansunion, LLC, Experian Information Solutions, Inc., and American Express Company.

What happened

In Waxler v. Equifax Information Services, LLC, the parties told the court that they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues. The court cancelled the scheduled conferences and other deadlines.

The court dismissed the case with prejudice and ordered that neither side would pay costs or attorneys’ fees. It directed the Clerk to terminate all open motions and close the case. Within 30 days, the parties could apply to reopen the case by showing good cause.

Judge Valerie Caproni also explained that the parties could ask the court to keep authority to enforce their settlement agreement. To do so, they had to submit the agreement and request that the court expressly retain jurisdiction within the same 30-day period. The order did not decide the underlying claims.

The detailed version

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

Case
Waxler v. Equifax Information Services, LLC · No. 1:20-cv-09107
Judge
Valerie Caproni
Date
Mar. 15, 2021

Background

On March 12, 2021, the parties notified the court that they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or the terms of the agreement. The listed defendants were Equifax Information Services, LLC; Tansunion, LLC; Experian Information Solutions, Inc.; and American Express Company.

Order

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 of Court 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. Any such application had to show good cause for keeping the case open despite the settlement. The order stated that a request filed after 30 days, or without a showing of good cause, could be denied solely on that basis.

The parties could also request that the court retain jurisdiction—that is, continuing authority—to enforce their settlement agreement. They had to submit the settlement agreement under Rule 6.A of the court’s Individual Practices and request an order expressly retaining jurisdiction, also within 30 days.

Ruling and classification

Judge Valerie Caproni entered a settlement-based dismissal with prejudice and directed that the case be closed. The court did not reach the merits of the underlying dispute. This is classified as a procedural order because it disposed of the case based on the parties’ settlement rather than deciding who was right on 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.