Aktar v. Equifax Information Services, LLC
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:22-cv-01449
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Aktar v. Equifax, Judge Caproni dismissed the case against Equifax with prejudice and without costs after an agreement in principle.
Fouzia Aktar and Equifax Information Services, LLC. The order dismisses the case with prejudice and without costs as to Equifax and does not state the disposition of claims against the other named defendants.
What happened
In Aktar v. Equifax Information Services, LLC, the parties told the court that Fouzia Aktar and Equifax had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues between them.
The court dismissed the case against Equifax with prejudice and without costs, including attorneys’ fees, and directed the Clerk of Court to terminate Equifax from the docket. The order does not state the disposition of claims against the other defendants.
Judge Valerie Caproni also allowed the parties to apply within 30 days to reopen the case for good cause. If they wanted the court to retain jurisdiction to enforce their settlement agreement, they had to submit the agreement and a request for retained jurisdiction within that same period.
The detailed version
- Aktar v. Equifax Information Services, LLC · No. 1:22-cv-01449
- Valerie Caproni
- Mar. 28, 2022
Background
On March 24, 2022, the parties notified the court that plaintiff Fouzia Aktar and defendant Equifax Information Services, LLC, had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues between them. The opinion does not provide the agreement’s terms.
Ruling
The court ordered that the case be dismissed with prejudice and without costs, including attorneys’ fees, as to Equifax Information Services, LLC. “With prejudice” means the dismissal bars refiling the dismissed claims against that defendant. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate Equifax from the docket. The order does not state what happened to the claims against JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., Experian Information Solutions, Inc., or TransUnion, LLC.
Possible Reopening and Enforcement
The parties could apply within 30 days to reopen the case. Any such application had to show good cause for keeping the case open despite the settlement, and a late application or one without a showing of good cause could be denied on that basis alone. If the parties wanted the court to retain jurisdiction to enforce their settlement agreement, they had to submit the agreement under Rule 6.A of the court’s Individual Practices and request an order expressly retaining that jurisdiction within the same 30-day period. Judge Valerie Caproni signed the order.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.