C.S. v. The Trustees of Columbia University in the City of New York
- Analisa Torres
- 1:24-cv-03232
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In C.S. v. The Trustees of Columbia University, Judge Torres set deadlines and a hearing on C.S.’s temporary-restraining-order request without deciding it.
C.S. and The Trustees of Columbia University in the City of New York, as the parties required to meet the filing, service, response, and hearing deadlines.
What happened
In C.S. v. The Trustees of Columbia University in the City of New York, C.S. asked the court for a temporary restraining order, which is an emergency request for immediate court action.
The court ordered C.S. to file unredacted versions of the complaint and motion under seal, confirm compliance with the court’s practices, and serve Columbia with specified documents by April 29, 2024. It set deadlines for Columbia’s opposition and C.S.’s reply.
Judge Analisa Torres scheduled a May 3 hearing on the request. The order did not state that the court granted or denied the temporary restraining order; it directed the parties to address the emergency-relief standard, class-action jurisdiction, possible mootness at the end of the school year, and whether the requested injunction would change the existing situation.
The detailed version
- C.S. v. The Trustees of Columbia University in the City of New York · No. 1:24-cv-03232
- Analisa Torres
- Apr. 29, 2024
Background
C.S., individually and on behalf of other similarly situated people, filed a motion seeking a temporary restraining order against The Trustees of Columbia University in the City of New York. A temporary restraining order is emergency relief that may temporarily require or prohibit conduct before the court fully resolves the request.
Court’s directions
After reviewing the motion, the court ordered C.S. to file unredacted versions of the complaint and the temporary-restraining-order motion under seal by April 29, 2024, at 9:00 p.m. C.S. also had to email chambers confirming compliance with Rule IV.B of the court’s Individual Practices in Civil Cases by that time. C.S. had to serve the defendant with unredacted versions of the complaint, the temporary-restraining-order motion, the motion to seal, and the order by the same deadline.
The court directed that any opposition by the defendant be filed by May 1, 2024, at 5:00 p.m., and that any reply by C.S. be filed by May 2, 2024, at 2:00 p.m.
Hearing and issues identified
The court scheduled a hearing for May 3, 2024, at 11:00 a.m. in Courtroom 15D of the United States Courthouse in New York. The parties were directed to be prepared to address whether C.S. met the standard for a temporary restraining order; whether the court had subject-matter jurisdiction under the Class Action Fairness Act; whether any requested injunctive relief could become moot when the school year ended; and whether the motion sought a mandatory injunction that would change the existing situation rather than a prohibitory injunction that would preserve it.
Disposition
The order set filing, service, response, and hearing requirements. It did not state that the court granted or denied C.S.’s motion for a temporary restraining order and did not decide the merits of the underlying dispute.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.