M.R. v. New York City Department of Education
- Ronnie Abrams
- 1:25-cv-01605
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In M.R. v. New York City Department of Education, Judge Abrams discontinued the case after a reported settlement in principle, allowing timely restoration.
M.R., E.R., and N.R., as well as the New York City Department of Education and Chancellor Melissa Aviles-Ramos in her official capacity. The action was closed, subject to a possible application to restore it within 30 days.
What happened
M.R. v. New York City Department of Education was brought by M.R. and E.R., individually and on behalf of N.R., against the New York City Department of Education and Chancellor Melissa Aviles-Ramos. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims.
The court was told that the case had been settled in principle. It discontinued the action without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring it to the court’s docket if an application was made within 30 days. The clerk was directed to close the case.
Judge Ronnie Abrams issued the order on June 11, 2025. The order also said that, to have the court retain jurisdiction to enforce a settlement, the parties had to place the settlement terms on the public record and obtain the court’s approval within the same 30-day period.
The detailed version
- M.R. v. New York City Department of Education · No. 1:25-cv-01605
- Ronnie Abrams
- June 11, 2025
Background
M.R. and E.R. sued individually and on behalf of N.R., a minor with a disability. The defendants were the New York City Department of Education and Chancellor Melissa Aviles-Ramos, in her official capacity. The opinion does not state what claims the plaintiffs brought.
Court’s Action
The court stated that it had been informed that the case had been settled in principle. It ordered that the action be discontinued without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring the action to the court’s docket if an application to restore it was made within 30 days. The order cautioned that an application filed after that period might be denied solely because it was late.
The court further stated that, if the parties wanted it to retain jurisdiction to enforce a settlement agreement, the settlement’s terms had to be placed on the public record and approved by the court within the same 30-day period. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case.
Disposition
Judge Ronnie Abrams discontinued the action without costs and without prejudice to timely restoration. The opinion does not state the settlement terms or resolve the underlying claims.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.