Warren v. New York City Department of Education

Justia Dockets & Filings Second Circuit New York Southern District Warren v. New York City Department of Education

Warren v. New York City Department of Education

Plaintiff:	Stephanie Warren
Defendant:	New York City Department of Education
Case Number:	1:2007cv09812
Filed:	November 5, 2007
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office:	Foley Square Office
County:	Kings
Presiding Judge:	John G. Koeltl
Nature of Suit:	Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Other
Cause of Action:	20 U.S.C. § 1401 Education: Handicapped Child Act
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
March 30, 2009	Filing 38 OPINION AND ORDER #97366 re: 16 MOTION to File Amicus Brief filed by New York Legal Assistance Group, Partnership for Children's Rights, Advocates for Children of New York, Inc., 22 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Stephanie Warren, 13 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by New York City Department of Education. The Court has considered all of the arguments raised by the parties. To the extent not specifically addressed above, the arguments are either moot or without merit. For the reasons discussed above, the DOE's motion for summary judgment (Docket No. 13) is granted and S.W.'s motion for summary judgment (Docket No. 22) is denied. The amicus organizations' motion for leave to file a memorandum of law amicus curiae (Docket No. 16) is granted. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment for the DOE and to close this case. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge John G. Koeltl on 3/30/2009) (tve) Modified on 4/2/2009 (mro).

Date Filed

Document Text

March 30, 2009

Filing 38 OPINION AND ORDER #97366 re: 16 MOTION to File Amicus Brief filed by New York Legal Assistance Group, Partnership for Children's Rights, Advocates for Children of New York, Inc., 22 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Stephanie Warren, 13 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by New York City Department of Education. The Court has considered all of the arguments raised by the parties. To the extent not specifically addressed above, the arguments are either moot or without merit. For the reasons discussed above, the DOE's motion for summary judgment (Docket No. 13) is granted and S.W.'s motion for summary judgment (Docket No. 22) is denied. The amicus organizations' motion for leave to file a memorandum of law amicus curiae (Docket No. 16) is granted. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment for the DOE and to close this case. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge John G. Koeltl on 3/30/2009) (tve) Modified on 4/2/2009 (mro).

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the New York Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Warren v. New York City Department of Education
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Stephanie Warren
Represented By:	Anton G. Papakhin
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: New York City Department of Education
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?