Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 17, 2022

Delacruz v. High Point University

Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Docket
1:22-cv-06525
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureClass Action
In one sentence

In Delacruz v. High Point University, Judge Abrams discontinued the settled-in-principle action without prejudice to timely restoration.

Who this affects

Emanuel Delacruz, the persons he sought to represent, and High Point University. The action was closed, subject to a possible application to restore it within 45 days.

What happened

Delacruz v. High Point University involved Emanuel Delacruz, on behalf of himself and others described as similarly situated, against High Point University. The court was told that the case had been settled in principle.

The court discontinued the action without costs to either party. The action could be restored if an application was made within 45 days of the order; the court also closed the case. If the parties wanted the court to keep authority to enforce a settlement, they had to place the settlement terms on the public record and obtain the court’s approval within that same 45-day period.

Judge Ronnie Abrams issued the order on October 17, 2022. The order closed the case and did not decide the underlying claims.

The detailed version

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

Case
Delacruz v. High Point University · No. 1:22-cv-06525
Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Date
Oct. 17, 2022

Background

Emanuel Delacruz brought the action on behalf of himself and all other persons described in the caption as similarly situated. The opinion states that the Court was informed that the case had been settled in principle. It does not provide the settlement’s terms or describe the underlying claims.

Order

The Court ordered that the action be discontinued without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring the action to the Court’s docket if an application to restore it was made within 45 days. It warned that an application filed after that period could be denied solely because it was late. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case.

The Court further stated that, if the parties wanted it to retain jurisdiction—that is, authority to enforce the settlement agreement—the agreement’s terms had to be placed on the public record and approved by the Court within the same 45-day period.

Disposition

Judge Ronnie Abrams discontinued the action under those conditions. The order addressed closing and potentially restoring the case; it did not rule on the merits of the underlying claims.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.