Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 9K views

    RushCard Settlement Motion

    Uploaded by

    Mandi Woodruff
    The parties in this class action lawsuit and three related lawsuits have reached a settlement agreement. They are requesting the court stay this case while they seek approval of the global settlement, which would resolve the claims in all four lawsuits. The parties believe approval of the settlement is in their best interest rather than continuing litigation. The court will adjourn all deadlines and hearings during the stay. The parties must update the court if they do not file for preliminary settlement approval within 60 days.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    RushCard Settlement Motion

    Uploaded by

    Mandi Woodruff
    9K views6 pages
    The parties in this class action lawsuit and three related lawsuits have reached a settlement agreement. They are requesting the court stay this case while they seek approval of the global settlement, which would resolve the claims in all four lawsuits. The parties believe approval of the settlement is in their best interest rather than continuing litigation. The court will adjourn all deadlines and hearings during the stay. The parties must update the court if they do not file for preliminary settlement approval within 60 days.

    Original Description:

    Judge grants Rushcard motion to pause class action lawsuits as settlement is reached.

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The parties in this class action lawsuit and three related lawsuits have reached a settlement agreement. They are requesting the court stay this case while they seek approval of the global settlement, which would resolve the claims in all four lawsuits. The parties believe approval of the settlement is in their best interest rather than continuing litigation. The court will adjourn all deadlines and hearings during the stay. The parties must update the court if they do not file for preliminary settlement approval within 60 days.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    9K views6 pages

    RushCard Settlement Motion

    Uploaded by

    Mandi Woodruff
    The parties in this class action lawsuit and three related lawsuits have reached a settlement agreement. They are requesting the court stay this case while they seek approval of the global settlement, which would resolve the claims in all four lawsuits. The parties believe approval of the settlement is in their best interest rather than continuing litigation. The court will adjourn all deadlines and hearings during the stay. The parties must update the court if they do not file for preliminary settlement approval within 60 days.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 6

    Case 1:15-cv-08372-JPO Document 30 Filed 03/11/16 Page 1 of 6

    UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT


    SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
    STEPHANIE FUENTES, JETAIME HOWARD,
    MIANIKA SMITH, SHARI GOODMAN, and
    JERMAIN HAYES, Individually And On Behalf of
    All Others Similarly Situated,,
    Plaintiffs,
    - against -

    Civil Action No. 15-cv-8372


    ECF CASE

    UNIRUSH, LLC d/b/a UNIRUSH FINANCIAL


    SERVICES, RUSH COMMUNICATIONS, LLC,
    RUSH COMMUNICATIONS of NYC, INC.,
    META FINANCIAL GROUP, INC., and
    METABANK,
    Defendants.

    STIPULATED MOTION TO STAY AND PROPOSED ORDER


    Plaintiffs Stephanie Fuentes, Jetaime Howard, Mianika Smith, Shari Goodman, and
    Jermain Hayes and Defendants UniRush, LLC d/b/a UniRush Financial Services, Rush
    Communications, LLC, Rush Communications of NYC, Inc., Meta Financial Group, Inc., and
    Metabank (jointly, the Parties), through their respective counsel, respectfully submit this
    Stipulated Motion to Stay. In support of this Motion to Stay, the Parties state:
    WHEREAS, previously the Parties informed the Court that they had been involved in
    discussions to seek a global resolution across four cases (the Actions):
    x

    Fuentes v. UniRush, LLC et al., Case No. 1:15-cv-08372 (S.D.N.Y.)

    Huff v. UniRush, LLC et al., Case No. 2:15-cv-02253-KJM-CMK (E.D.Cal.)

    Jones v. UniRush, LLC et al., Case No. 5:15-cv-05996-JLS (E.D. Pa.)

    Peterkin v. UniRush, LLC et al., Case No. 1:15-cv-08573 (S.D.N.Y.)

    Case 1:15-cv-08372-JPO Document 30 Filed 03/11/16 Page 2 of 6

    WHEREAS, all of the four above-mentioned cases contain overlapping claims and arose
    from a substantially similar series of events and seek to represent an overlapping nationwide
    class;
    WHEREAS, Plaintiffs and Defendants in this Action are finalizing the terms of a
    Settlement Agreement, and the Parties in all Actions will be seeking approval of the agreement
    in this Action, which was filed first;
    WHEREAS, approval of the settlement will resolve the claims in this case;
    WHEREAS, the Parties believe they will file their motion for preliminary approval
    within 60 days of this Motion;
    WHEREAS, the Parties believe that it is in their interests to pursue approval of the
    Settlement rather than proceed with litigation of these claims;
    NOW, THEREFORE, it is stipulated by and between the Parties, by and through their
    respective counsel, that:
    1.

    This case shall be stayed pending the Parties seeking full approval of the

    Settlement in this Action, and during the period the Court considers this request, all deadlines,
    conferences, and hearing dates are adjourned, and
    2.

    The Parties will jointly report to the Court should the Parties not file their motion

    for preliminary approval within 60 days of this Motion.

    Case 1:15-cv-08372-JPO Document 30 Filed 03/11/16 Page 3 of 6

    Case 1:15-cv-08372-JPO Document 30 Filed 03/11/16 Page 4 of 6

    Case 1:15-cv-08372-JPO Document 30 Filed 03/11/16 Page 5 of 6

    Case 1:15-cv-08372-JPO Document 30 Filed 03/11/16 Page 6 of 6

    UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT


    SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
    STEPHANIE FUENTES, JETAIME HOWARD,
    MIANIKA SMITH, SHARI GOODMAN, and
    JERMAIN HAYES, Individually And On Behalf of
    All Others Similarly Situated,,
    Plaintiffs,

    Civil Action No. 15-cv-8372

    - against -

    ECF CASE

    UNIRUSH, LLC d/b/a UNIRUSH FINANCIAL


    SERVICES, RUSH COMMUNICATIONS, LLC,
    RUSH COMMUNICATIONS of NYC, INC.,
    META FINANCIAL GROUP, INC., and
    METABANK,
    Defendants.

    [PROPOSED] ORDER
    This Court, having duly considered the Parties Stipulated Motion To Stay, and good
    cause appearing, hereby orders as follows:
    1.

    This case shall be stayed pending the Parties seeking full approval of the

    Settlement in this Action, and during the period the Court considers this request, all deadlines,
    conferences, and hearing dates are adjourned, and
    2.

    The Parties will jointly report to the Court should the Parties not file their motion

    for preliminary approval within 60 days of this Motion.


    IT IS SO ORDERED
    Dated: _________________
    Hon. J. Paul Oetken
    United States District Judge

    You might also like