Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 29, 2024

Knowles v. Illinois Wesleyan University, Incorporated

Judge
Rochon
Docket
1:24-cv-01462
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureClass Action
In one sentence

In Knowles v. Illinois Wesleyan, Judge Rochon ordered the parties to discuss settlement and submit a joint update without deciding the case’s merits.

Who this affects

Carlton Knowles and Illinois Wesleyan University, Incorporated, as the parties required to conduct settlement discussions and submit a joint letter.

What happened

Knowles v. Illinois Wesleyan University, Incorporated concerns a case brought by Carlton Knowles on behalf of himself and others similarly situated. The opinion is a case-management order, not a decision on the underlying claims.

The court ordered the parties to meet for at least one hour within 30 days after service of the summons and complaint, or after waiver of service, to make a good-faith effort to settle. They must discuss whether Knowles has legal standing to bring the case and whether mediation or a settlement conference would be useful if they cannot settle themselves.

Within 45 days after service or waiver of service, the parties must submit a joint letter stating whether they settled. If not, they must ask the court either to refer the case to mediation or a magistrate judge for a settlement conference, or to schedule an initial status conference. Judge Jennifer L. Rochon did not decide standing or the merits of the claims.

The detailed version

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

Case
Knowles v. Illinois Wesleyan University, Incorporated · No. 1:24-cv-01462
Judge
Rochon
Date
Feb. 29, 2024

Background

Carlton Knowles brought this action on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated against Illinois Wesleyan University, Incorporated. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims.

Court’s Order

The court ordered the parties to meet and confer for at least one hour within 30 days after service of the summons and complaint, or within 30 days after waiver of service. The meeting must include a good-faith attempt to settle the action. The parties were specifically directed to consider whether Knowles satisfied the threshold requirement of standing, meaning whether he was legally entitled to bring the case.

If the parties could not settle the action themselves, they were also ordered to discuss whether further settlement discussions through the court-annexed mediation program or before a magistrate judge would be productive at that time.

Within 15 additional days—45 days after service of the summons and complaint, or 45 days after waiver of service—the parties must submit a joint letter informing the court whether they settled. If they did not settle, the letter must request either a referral to mediation or to a magistrate judge for a settlement conference, with a preference stated between those options, or an initial status conference.

Disposition and Scope

This order required settlement-related discussions and a joint status submission. It did not decide standing, certify a class, or resolve the merits of Knowles’s claims. Judge Jennifer L. Rochon issued the order on February 29, 2024.

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.