Stevez v. Ouachita Baptist University
- Vyskocil
- 1:21-cv-09074
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Stevez v. Ouachita Baptist University, Judge Vyskocil discontinued the action after a settlement in principle, subject to restoration by February 24, 2022.
Arturo Stevez, the people he represented as similarly situated, and Ouachita Baptist University are affected by the conditional discontinuance and dismissal of the action.
What happened
Arturo Stevez brought Stevez v. Ouachita Baptist University on behalf of himself and other similarly situated people. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims.
Stevez informed the court that the parties had reached a settlement in principle. The opinion does not provide the settlement’s terms.
Judge Vyskocil ordered the action discontinued without costs, while allowing restoration by February 24, 2022. If no restoration request is made by then, the dismissal will be with prejudice; the court will not retain authority to enforce the settlement.
The detailed version
- Stevez v. Ouachita Baptist University · No. 1:21-cv-09074
- Vyskocil
- Jan. 10, 2022
Background
Arturo Stevez filed the action on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly situated against Ouachita Baptist University. The opinion does not state the underlying claims or the relief sought.
The court received a letter from Stevez stating that the parties had reached a settlement in principle. The opinion does not state the settlement’s terms or indicate that the court approved those terms.
Ruling
Judge Vyskocil ordered that the action be discontinued without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring it to the court’s calendar if an application to restore the action is made by February 24, 2022. If no such application is made by that date, the dismissal of the action will be with prejudice. The court also stated that it would not retain jurisdiction, meaning continuing authority, to enforce any settlement agreement. All other dates and deadlines were adjourned without a new date.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.