R.B.S. v. New York City Department of Education
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:24-cv-03549
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In R.B.S. v. New York City Department of Education, Judge Caproni dismissed the settled case with prejudice and allowed 30 days to seek reopening.
R.B.S. and her minor child, S.S., as well as the New York City Department of Education, the Board of Education of the City School District of the City of New York, Chancellor David Banks in his official capacity, and the City of New York. The case was dismissed with prejudice, and no costs or attorneys’ fees were awarded to either party.
What happened
R.B.S. v. New York City Department of Education involved R.B.S., acting for herself and her minor child, S.S., against the listed education officials and entities. The parties told the court that they had reached an agreement on all issues.
The court canceled all scheduled conferences and deadlines, terminated the open motions, and directed the Clerk of Court to close the case. The opinion does not describe the settlement’s terms or the underlying claims.
Judge Valerie Caproni dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, including attorneys’ fees, to either party. The parties could apply within 30 days to reopen the case by showing good cause; they could also ask the court to retain authority to enforce their settlement by submitting the agreement and a separate request within that period.
The detailed version
- R.B.S. v. New York City Department of Education · No. 1:24-cv-03549
- Valerie Caproni
- May 23, 2025
Background
R.B.S. brought the case on behalf of herself and her minor child, S.S., against the New York City Department of Education, the Board of Education of the City School District of the City of New York, Chancellor David Banks in his official capacity, and the City of New York. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims.
On May 23, 2025, the parties notified the court that they had reached an agreement on all issues. The order does not disclose the agreement’s terms.
Court’s Order
The court canceled all previously scheduled conferences and other deadlines. It dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, including attorneys’ fees, to either party. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate all open motions and close the case.
The order allowed the parties to apply within 30 days to reopen the case. Any such application had to show good cause for keeping the case open despite the settlement, and a request filed after 30 days or without a showing of good cause could be denied on that basis alone.
The parties could also ask the court to retain jurisdiction—meaning continuing authority—to enforce the settlement agreement. To do so, they had to submit the settlement agreement under the court’s individual practices and request an order expressly retaining that authority within the same 30-day period.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.