Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Nov. 7, 2022

Delacruz v. Trustees of Boston College

Judge
Vyskocil
Docket
1:22-cv-06521
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureClass Action
In one sentence

In Delacruz v. Trustees of Boston College, Judge Vyskocil discontinued the action after a settlement in principle, subject to restoration by December 7, 2022.

Who this affects

Emanuel Delacruz, the similarly situated persons he sought to represent, and Trustees of Boston College. The action was discontinued under the conditions stated in the order.

What happened

In Delacruz v. Trustees of Boston College, Emanuel Delacruz told the court that the parties had reached a settlement in principle. He had brought the action on behalf of himself and other similarly situated people.

The court discontinued the action without costs to either party. The case could be restored if the parties could not put their settlement in writing and an application to restore it was filed by December 7, 2022.

Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil ordered that, if no restoration application was filed by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice, meaning the action could not be restored under that order.

The detailed version

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

Case
Delacruz v. Trustees of Boston College · No. 1:22-cv-06521
Judge
Vyskocil
Date
Nov. 7, 2022

Background

Emanuel Delacruz filed the action on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly situated against Trustees of Boston College. The opinion states that Delacruz sent the court a letter reporting that the parties had reached a settlement in principle. It does not describe the claims or the settlement terms.

Court’s Action

The court ordered that the action be discontinued without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring the action to the court’s calendar. Restoration was permitted if the parties were unable to memorialize their settlement in writing, but the application to restore the action had to be made by December 7, 2022.

The order further states that, if no application to restore the action was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice. The court did not decide the underlying claims.

Ruling

Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil entered the order of dismissal on November 7, 2022. The disposition was based on the reported settlement in principle, not on a decision about the merits of the parties’ dispute.

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.