Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 8, 2025

L.W. v. New York City Department of Education

Full caption

L.W., individually and on behalf of her son K.W. v. New York City Department of Education

Judge
Vyskocil
Docket
1:24-cv-07716
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Fee PetitionCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In L.W. v. New York City Department of Education, Judge Vyskocil denied the fee motion as moot and discontinued the action, allowing restoration by November 8, 2025.

Who this affects

L.W., individually and on behalf of her son K.W., and the New York City Department of Education; the order resolved the pending attorney’s-fee motion and discontinued their action subject to the stated restoration deadline.

What happened

In L.W. v. New York City Department of Education, the court was informed that the parties had settled their dispute over attorney’s fees.

The court denied the pending fee motion as moot and discontinued the case without costs. The case could be restored if the parties could not put their settlement in writing and an application was filed by November 8, 2025. If no application was filed by then, the dismissal would be with prejudice.

Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil also adjourned all other dates and deadlines without setting new dates.

The detailed version

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

Case
L.W. v. New York City Department of Education · No. 1:24-cv-07716
Judge
Vyskocil
Date
Oct. 8, 2025

Background The court was informed by the Magistrate Judge that the parties had settled their dispute over attorney’s fees. The pending motion for attorney’s fees was docketed as ECF No. 42.

Rulings The court denied the motion for attorney’s fees as moot, meaning that the settlement made a ruling on that motion unnecessary.

The court also discontinued the action without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring it to the court’s calendar if the parties were unable to memorialize their settlement in writing. An application to restore the action had to be made by November 8, 2025. If no such application was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice. The court adjourned all other dates and deadlines without setting new dates.

Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil, United States District Judge, signed the order.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.