Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 9, 2025

Handberry v. Thompson

Judge
George Daniels
Docket
1:96-cv-06161
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureDiscovery
In one sentence

In Handberry v. Thompson, Judge Daniels granted, as modified, a request to extend a deadline for plans protecting student records.

Who this affects

The plaintiff class and defendants in the case, including the parties’ process for exchanging information and submitting FERPA-compliance plans.

What happened

In Handberry v. Thompson, the plaintiffs and defendants were negotiating a process to comply with the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, a federal law protecting student education records. The plaintiffs sought information about students in the custody of the New York City Department of Correction while defendants argued that some information was protected.

The plaintiffs said delays prevented the parties from meeting their deadline for submitting a compliance plan. They asked to extend the deadline to January 10, 2025, and proposed that the parties submit either a joint plan or separate plans if they could not agree.

The court granted the request as modified. Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger extended the deadline to January 15, 2025, and directed the parties to submit either a joint or competing compliance plan.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Handberry v. Thompson · No. 1:96-cv-06161
Judge
George Daniels
Date
Jan. 9, 2025

Background

The plaintiffs reported on negotiations concerning a process to ensure compliance with the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974 (FERPA), which protects the privacy of student education records. The plaintiffs had sought information from the defendants to address what they described as the defendants’ systemic denial of high school education to students in the custody of the New York City Department of Correction. The defendants asserted that some requested information was protected by FERPA and could not be disclosed to plaintiffs’ counsel.

At a December 12, 2024 conference, the court directed the parties to work together and submit a proposal addressing FERPA compliance. After the defendants received an extension of the original deadline, the plaintiffs requested another extension, stating that the parties could not meet the deadline because of delays and unresolved issues concerning both a proposed compliance order and a proposed notice to class members.

Ruling

The court granted the plaintiffs’ request as modified. The order extended the deadline to January 15, 2025, by which date the parties were directed to submit either a joint FERPA-compliance plan or competing plans. The order was signed by United States Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.