Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 15, 2024

Hedges v. Universal Tea Company, Inc.

Judge
Garnett
Docket
1:24-cv-02694
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Hedges v. Universal Tea, Judge Garnett ordered the parties to try settlement and report whether they settled.

Who this affects

Donna Hedges, Universal Tea Company, and counsel who had entered appearances or had not yet appeared.

What happened

In Hedges v. Universal Tea Company, Donna Hedges brought the action on behalf of herself and other similarly situated people. The order does not describe the claims or decide whether Hedges has standing to sue.

The court ordered the parties to meet for at least one hour within 30 days after the defendant is served with the summons and complaint. They must make a good-faith effort to settle and discuss whether Hedges meets the basic requirement of having standing. If they cannot settle, they must consider court-connected mediation or a settlement conference before a magistrate judge.

Within 45 days after service, the parties must file a joint letter stating whether they settled. If not, they must ask for mediation or a settlement conference, or request an initial status conference. Judge Margaret M. Garnett also directed appearing counsel to serve the order and the court’s rules on parties or counsel who had not yet appeared. The court did not decide the merits of the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Hedges v. Universal Tea Company, Inc. · No. 1:24-cv-02694
Judge
Garnett
Date
Apr. 15, 2024

Background

Donna Hedges sued Universal Tea Company on behalf of herself and other similarly situated people. The opinion does not state the legal claims or provide facts about the dispute.

Settlement and Standing Discussions

The court ordered the parties to meet and confer for at least one hour within 30 days after service of the summons and complaint on the defendant. They must make a good-faith attempt to settle the action. During those discussions, they must consider whether Hedges has standing, meaning a sufficient legal connection to the alleged injury to bring the case. The order cites decisions discussing that threshold issue.

If the parties cannot settle on their own, they must also discuss whether additional settlement discussions through the district’s court-annexed mediation program or before a magistrate judge would be productive.

Required Joint Letter and Notice

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

Counsel who had filed notices of appearance by the date of the order must promptly serve the order and the judge’s Individual Rules and Practices on counsel who had not appeared. If they do not know the identity of such counsel, they must send those materials directly to the party. Counsel must file proof of that notice with the court.

Disposition

The court entered case-management and settlement directives. It did not rule on standing, the merits of Hedges’s claims, or any motion. The order is therefore a procedural order.

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.