Desrosiers v. Securitas Security Services USA, Inc.
- Lorna Schofield
- 1:21-cv-00752
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Desrosiers v. Securitas, Judge Schofield granted the parties’ request to pause deadlines while they finalized a proposed settlement for court review.
Desrosiers and Securitas Security Services USA, Inc.; all pending case deadlines and court conferences were postponed, and the parties were required to submit settlement materials by June 17, 2021.
What happened
Desrosiers v. Securitas Security Services USA, Inc. involves retaliation claims. The parties told the court they had reached an agreement in principle and asked to pause existing deadlines and conferences while they finalized a settlement.
The court granted that request. It postponed all pending deadlines and conferences without setting new dates, and gave the parties until June 17, 2021, to submit the settlement agreement and a joint letter with supporting evidence.
Judge Schofield required those materials to address the findings needed for the court to decide whether the settlement is fair and reasonable. The order did not rule on the retaliation claims or enter the requested dismissal.
The detailed version
- Desrosiers v. Securitas Security Services USA, Inc. · No. 1:21-cv-00752
- Lorna Schofield
- May 18, 2021
Background
The filing states that Desrosiers brought retaliation claims against Securitas Security Services USA, Inc. Counsel notified the court that all parties had reached an agreement in principle to resolve the matter. They asked the court to postpone existing deadlines and conferences and to allow 30 days to finalize the settlement agreement and file a joint dismissal with prejudice.
Order
The court granted the parties’ request. It adjourned all pending deadlines and court conferences “sine die,” meaning without setting a new date. By June 17, 2021, the parties had to submit the settlement agreement and a joint letter with supporting evidence addressing the findings the court must make to determine whether the settlement is fair and reasonable.
Disposition and Effect
This was a procedural order concerning settlement administration. The text does not state that the court approved the settlement, entered a dismissal, or decided the retaliation claims. It directs the parties to submit materials for the court’s review.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.