No. 20-713

Rosa Elba Ventura de Paulino v. New York City Department of Education, et al.

Lower Court: Second Circuit
Docketed: 2020-11-24
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Response WaivedRelisted (2)
Tags: civil-rights disability-rights due-process educational-support idea-act individuals-with-disabilities-education-act pendency pendency-services school-district special-education
Key Terms:
DueProcess
Latest Conference: 2021-03-05 (distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Does a school district have an affirmative obligation to provide pendency-related educational and support services to its special education students under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Does a school district have an affirmative obligation to provide pendency-related educational and support services to its special education students under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act ("IDEA"), 20 U.S.C. §1400, et seq.? If a school district has such an obligation, may the parent of a special education student procure the pendency services to which the student is entitled under the IDEA, when the district has failed to procure them?

Docket Entries

2021-03-08
Rehearing DENIED.
2021-02-17
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/5/2021.
2021-02-05
2021-01-11
Petition DENIED.
2020-12-16
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/8/2021.
2020-12-09
Waiver of right of respondent New York State Education Department to respond filed.
2020-12-04
Waiver of right of respondent New York City Department of Education to respond filed.
2020-11-19
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due December 28, 2020)

Attorneys

New York City Department of Education
Eric LeeNew York City Law Department, Respondent
New York State Education Department
Barbara Dale UnderwoodSolicitor General, Respondent
Rosa Ventura De Paulino
Rory J. BellantoniBrain Injury Rights Group, Ltd., Petitioner