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

Norris v. RPC Restaurant Corp.

Judge
Rochon
Docket
1:21-cv-08956
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Namel Norris v. RPC Restaurant Corp., Judge Rochon ordered settlement discussions and a joint status letter.

Who this affects

Namel Norris and RPC Restaurant Corp. and the other defendants, who must participate in the ordered settlement discussions and submit the required joint letter.

What happened

Namel Norris v. RPC Restaurant Corp. is a federal case assigned to Judge Jennifer L. Rochon for all purposes. The opinion does not describe the claims or the parties’ positions.

The court ordered the parties to meet for at least one hour within 30 days after service of the summons and complaint to try in good faith to settle. They must discuss whether Norris has met the legal requirement of standing and whether further settlement discussions through mediation or a magistrate judge would be useful.

Judge Rochon also ordered the parties to file a joint letter within 15 additional days stating whether they settled. If they did not settle, the letter must request either mediation or a settlement conference before a magistrate judge, or an initial status conference. The order did not decide standing or the merits of the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Norris v. RPC Restaurant Corp. · No. 1:21-cv-08956
Judge
Rochon
Date
Nov. 7, 2022

Order and case status

The case was assigned to Judge Jennifer L. Rochon for all purposes. The opinion is a case-management and settlement order; it does not decide the claims, standing, or any other merits issue.

Settlement meeting

The court ordered the parties to meet and confer—that is, discuss the case with each other—in a good-faith effort to settle the action. The meeting must last at least one hour and must occur within 30 days after service of the summons and complaint.

During those discussions, the parties must consider whether the plaintiff has satisfied the threshold requirement of standing, meaning the requirement that the plaintiff has the legally required connection to bring the case. The court cited Second Circuit decisions addressing standing but did not decide whether standing exists here. If the parties cannot settle on their own, they must also discuss whether additional settlement discussions through the district court’s mediation program or before a magistrate judge would be productive.

Joint letter and next steps

Within 15 additional days—45 days after service of the summons and complaint—the parties must submit a joint letter telling the court whether they settled. If they did not settle, the letter must ask the court either to refer the case to mediation or to a magistrate judge for a settlement conference, while stating the parties’ preference between those options, or to proceed with an initial status conference.

Disposition

Judge Rochon issued the settlement and scheduling directives described above. The order did not grant or deny a motion, dismiss the case, resolve standing, or determine which side is legally correct.

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.