Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 11, 2022

Williams Steele v. Equifax

Judge
Jesse Furman
Docket
1:21-cv-05997
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureDiscovery
In one sentence

In Williams Steele v. Equifax, Judge Furman reassigned the case and ordered a joint status letter without deciding the claims.

Who this affects

Beatrice Shirley Williams Steele, Equifax and the other defendants, and their counsel; the Clerk of Court was directed to mail the order to Beatrice Shirley Williams Steele.

What happened

Beatrice Shirley Williams Steele v. Equifax was reassigned to Judge Jesse M. Furman. The order did not decide the parties’ underlying dispute.

The parties must file a joint letter by April 18, 2022, describing the case, jurisdiction and venue, deadlines, conferences, motions, appeals, discovery, settlement discussions, possible mediation, and expected trial length. The order also says existing deadlines remain in effect, while scheduled conferences or oral arguments before the district judge are adjourned unless otherwise ordered.

Judge Jesse M. Furman directed the parties to provide this status update and directed the Clerk of Court to mail a copy of the order to Beatrice Shirley Williams Steele.

The detailed version

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

Case
Williams Steele v. Equifax · No. 1:21-cv-05997
Judge
Jesse Furman
Date
Apr. 11, 2022

Background

The case was reassigned to United States District Judge Jesse M. Furman. The order does not describe the merits of Beatrice Shirley Williams Steele’s claims against Equifax and the other defendants.

Court’s Order

The court ordered the parties to file a joint letter on the electronic filing system by April 18, 2022. The letter may not exceed five pages and must separately address:

- Counsel’s names and current contact information; - The nature of the case and principal defenses; - Why federal jurisdiction and venue are proper, including required citizenship information if jurisdiction is based on diversity of citizenship; - Existing deadlines and cutoff dates; - Previously scheduled conferences that have not occurred; - Outstanding motions and the relief requested; - Pending appeals; - Discovery completed and any discovery needed for meaningful settlement discussions; - Prior settlement discussions; - Whether the parties have considered settlement conferences, the District’s Mediation Program, or a private mediator; - Estimated trial length; and - Other information that could help move the case toward settlement or trial.

The order states that existing dates and deadlines remain in effect despite the reassignment. Scheduled conferences or oral arguments before Judge Furman are adjourned pending further order, but appearances scheduled before the assigned magistrate judge remain in effect. If the case has already been settled or otherwise terminated, the parties do not need to file the joint letter if they file appropriate proof of termination before the deadline. The order also sets requirements for requests to extend deadlines or adjourn conferences.

Disposition

This was a case-management order. It required a status update and addressed scheduling; it did not grant or deny a merits motion, dismiss the case, or decide the underlying claims. Judge Jesse M. Furman also directed the Clerk of Court to mail a copy of the order to Beatrice Shirley Williams Steele.

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.