Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Chen-Oster v. Goldman, Sachs & Co., 10 Civ. 6950 (AT) (RWL). (2020)

Court: District Court, S.D. New York Number: infdco20200124790 Visitors: 2
Filed: Jan. 16, 2020
Latest Update: Jan. 16, 2020
Summary: ORDER ROBERT W. LEHRBURGER , Magistrate Judge . On January 16, 2020, the Court heard oral argument on Defendants' Motion to Compel Arbitration and Plaintiffs' Cross-Motion For Relief Under Rule 23(d). (Dkt. 715, 717.) As discussed during argument, the various briefings and statements in this case reveal some discrepancies in the number and type of arbitration agreements in dispute. Accordingly: 1. By January 30, 2020, the parties shall meet and confer, and submit to the Court an agreed-up
More

ORDER

On January 16, 2020, the Court heard oral argument on Defendants' Motion to Compel Arbitration and Plaintiffs' Cross-Motion For Relief Under Rule 23(d). (Dkt. 715, 717.) As discussed during argument, the various briefings and statements in this case reveal some discrepancies in the number and type of arbitration agreements in dispute. Accordingly:

1. By January 30, 2020, the parties shall meet and confer, and submit to the Court an agreed-upon set of numbers with respect to the agreements/categories identified in the chart below. The number of any particular category of agreement should reflect the number for which Defendants seek to compel arbitration. The numbers should reflect those prior to concessions made at oral argument.

Pre-Complaint Post-Complaint Post-Cert Total and Pre-Cert Separation Agreements MD Promotion Agreements PWA Agreements Equity Agreements Total number of agreements that Defendants seek to compel to arbitration Total number of Class Members who Defendants seek to compel to arbitration Type(s) and total number of agreements that Plaintiffs seek to void as unconscionable Type(s) and total number of agreements that Plaintiffs seek to void under Rule 23(d) Total number of Class Members for whom Plaintiffs seek to void arbitration agreements as unconscionable or under Rule 23(d)

2. The submission shall also identify any concessions made by Plaintiffs at oral argument (or since) as to how many agreements of each type and category they no longer object to based on unconscionability, based on Rule 23(d) or based on any other reason as the case may be.

3. By January 23, 2020, Plaintiffs and Defendants shall separately file on ECF the three demonstrative exhibits provided to the Court during oral argument.

SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer