N.S. and O.S. v. New York City Department of Education

Justia Dockets & Filings Second Circuit New York Southern District N.S. and O.S. v. New York City Department of Education

N.S. and O.S. v. New York City Department of Education

Plaintiff:	N.S. and O.S.
Defendant:	New York City Department of Education
Case Number:	1:2013cv07819
Filed:	November 4, 2013
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office:	Foley Square Office
County:	New York
Presiding Judge:	John G. Koeltl
Nature of Suit:	Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action:	20 U.S.C. § 1400
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
June 16, 2014	Filing 28 OPINION AND ORDER re: 21 MOTION for Summary Judgment and Modified de novo Review. filed by N.S. and O.S., 24 CROSS MOTION for Summary Judgment . filed by New York City Department of Education. The DOE offered S.S. a free approp riate public education. S.S.'s parents chose to forgo placement in a public school with which they were not familiar and opted to remain with Imagine Academy, a private school with which they were familiar and comfortable. That was their choice, but they have not demonstrated that the school district must reimburse them for that decision. For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs' motion for a modified de novo review, adjudication on the merits, and summary judgment is DENIED. Defendant's cross-motion for summary judgment is GRANTED. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment forDefendant, to terminate Dkt. 21 and Dkt. 24, and to terminate the case. (Signed by Judge Valerie E. Caproni on 6/16/2014) (djc)

Date Filed

Document Text

June 16, 2014

Filing 28 OPINION AND ORDER re: 21 MOTION for Summary Judgment and Modified de novo Review. filed by N.S. and O.S., 24 CROSS MOTION for Summary Judgment . filed by New York City Department of Education. The DOE offered S.S. a free approp riate public education. S.S.'s parents chose to forgo placement in a public school with which they were not familiar and opted to remain with Imagine Academy, a private school with which they were familiar and comfortable. That was their choice, but they have not demonstrated that the school district must reimburse them for that decision. For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs' motion for a modified de novo review, adjudication on the merits, and summary judgment is DENIED. Defendant's cross-motion for summary judgment is GRANTED. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment forDefendant, to terminate Dkt. 21 and Dkt. 24, and to terminate the case. (Signed by Judge Valerie E. Caproni on 6/16/2014) (djc)

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: N.S. and O.S. 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: N.S. and O.S.
Represented By:	Jacqueline Marie Devore
Represented By:	Gary S Mayerson
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
Represented By:	Eric Brent Porter
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?