R.S. v. New York City Department Of Education

S.D. New York

R.S. v. New York City Department Of Education

DecidedFebruary 17, 2023

Docket1:21-cv-02257

StatusUnknown

This text of R.S. v. New York City Department Of Education (R.S. v. New York City Department Of Education) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

R.S. v. New York City Department Of Education, (S.D.N.Y. 2023).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

R.S. et al., Plaintiffs, 21-CV-2257 (JPO) -v- ORDER New York City Department of Education, et al., Defendants.

J. PAUL OETKEN, District Judge: Defendants (“NYDOE”) move for reconsideration of this Court’s Memorandum and Order resolving the Plaintiffs’ motion for judgment on the administrative record, resolving certain issues related to the pendency date of reimbursements under the IDEA for private school tuition. (Dkt. No. 39.) Specifically, NYDOE argues that this Court erred in fixing June 23rd, 2020, as the date from which NYDOE must provide tuition reimbursements to Plaintiffs. Having reviewed the record and the parties’ memorandums of law, the Court concludes that NYDOE’s motion for this “extraordinary remedy” is moot. Drapkin v. Mafco Consol. Grp., Inc., 818 F. Supp. 2d 678, 695 (S.D.N.Y. 2011). A September 14, 2022 findings of fact and decision (“FOFD”) awarded the Plaintiffs tuition reimbursements for July 1, 2020 to June 30, 2021. (See ECF No. 60.) A prior FOFD awarded Plaintiffs tuition reimbursements from the start of the 2019 school year up through June 30, 2020. A ruling on Defendants’ motion for reconsideration would therefore have no tangible impact: regardless, Defendants have already been ordered to provide tuition reimbursements for the time at issue.1

1 For the same reason, Plaintiffs’ late-stage request for pre- and post- judgment interest, introduced in their opposition to Defendants motion for reconsideration, is also denied. Defendants’ motion for reconsideration is therefore DENIED as moot. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close the motion at Docket Number 43. SO ORDERED. Dated: February 17, 2023 New York, New York

| J. PAUL OETKEN United States District Judge

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

R.S. et al., Plaintiffs, 21-CV-2257 (JPO) -v- ORDER New York City Department of Education, et al., Defendants.

J. PAUL OETKEN, District Judge: Defendants (“NYDOE”) move for reconsideration of this Court’s Memorandum and Order resolving the Plaintiffs’ motion for judgment on the administrative record, resolving certain issues related to the pendency date of reimbursements under the IDEA for private school tuition. (Dkt. No. 39.) Specifically, NYDOE argues that this Court erred in fixing June 23rd, 2020, as the date from which NYDOE must provide tuition reimbursements to Plaintiffs. Having reviewed the record and the parties’ memorandums of law, the Court concludes that NYDOE’s motion for this “extraordinary remedy” is moot. Drapkin v. Mafco Consol. Grp., Inc., 818 F. Supp. 2d 678, 695 (S.D.N.Y. 2011). A September 14, 2022 findings of fact and decision (“FOFD”) awarded the Plaintiffs tuition reimbursements for July 1, 2020 to June 30, 2021. (See ECF No. 60.) A prior FOFD awarded Plaintiffs tuition reimbursements from the start of the 2019 school year up through June 30, 2020. A ruling on Defendants’ motion for reconsideration would therefore have no tangible impact: regardless, Defendants have already been ordered to provide tuition reimbursements for the time at issue.1

1 For the same reason, Plaintiffs’ late-stage request for pre- and post- judgment interest, introduced in their opposition to Defendants motion for reconsideration, is also denied. Defendants’ motion for reconsideration is therefore DENIED as moot. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close the motion at Docket Number 43. SO ORDERED. Dated: February 17, 2023 New York, New York

| J. PAUL OETKEN United States District Judge

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

R.S. v. New York City Department Of Education, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rs-v-new-york-city-department-of-education-nysd-2023.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack