C.N. v. Ridgewood Bd of Ed
This text of C.N. v. Ridgewood Bd of Ed (C.N. v. Ridgewood Bd of Ed) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Opinions of the United 2005 Decisions States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
12-12-2005
C.N. v. Ridgewood Bd of Ed Precedential or Non-Precedential: Precedential
Docket No. 04-2849
Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2005
Recommended Citation "C.N. v. Ridgewood Bd of Ed" (2005). 2005 Decisions. Paper 25. http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2005/25
This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2005 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
No. 04-2849
C. N., Individually and as Guardian Ad Litem of J.N., a Minor; L. M., Individually and as Guardian Ad Litem of V.M., a Minor; M. E., Individually and as Guardian Ad Litem of J.E., a Minor,
Appellants
v.
RIDGEWOOD BOARD OF EDUCATION; FREDERICK J. STOKLEY; JOYCE SNIDER; RONALD VERDICCHIO; ROBERT WEAKLEY; JOHN MUCCIOLO; ANTHONY BENCIVENGA; SHEILA BROGAN
On Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey (D.C. No. 00-cv-01072) District Judge: Honorable Jose L. Linares
Argued April 1, 2005 Before: ALITO, SMITH and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
ORDER AMENDING OPINION
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the opinion in the above case, filed December 1, 2005, be amended as follows: Page 31, the last two sentences in the first full paragraph, which read: We explain both conclusions in Part V, sub-sections A & B. Then, in Part VI, we explain why, even assuming the survey was involuntary, no constitutional violations have been shown. shall read: We explain both conclusions in Part IV, sub-sections A & B. Then, in Part V, we explain why, even assuming the survey was involuntary, no constitutional violations have been shown.
By the Court,
/s/ D. Michael Fisher Circuit Judge Dated: December 12, 2005
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
C.N. v. Ridgewood Bd of Ed, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cn-v-ridgewood-bd-of-ed-ca3-2005.