Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled May 19, 2020

Erde v. Carranza

Judge
Katherine Failla
Docket
1:19-cv-08401
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedurePreliminary InjunctionMotion to Dismiss
In one sentence

In Erde v. Carranza, Judge Failla ordered supplemental briefs addressing a new appellate decision’s effect on pending motions.

Who this affects

The plaintiffs and defendants in Erde v. Carranza, whose pending motions were subject to the court’s supplemental-briefing order.

What happened

Erde v. Carranza concerns a pending motion for a preliminary injunction by the plaintiffs and a pending motion to dismiss by the defendants. The opinion identifies the plaintiffs as Susanne Erde and Michael Erde, acting as parents and guardians of J.E., and the defendants as Richard Carranza, the New York City Department of Education, and the New York State Education Department.

The Second Circuit had issued a decision in Ventura de Paulino v. New York City Department of Education on May 18, 2020. The district court directed both sides to explain how that decision affects the pending motions.

Judge Katherine Polk Failla ordered the parties to file supplemental letter briefs by June 3, 2020. The order did not decide the preliminary-injunction motion or the motion to dismiss.

The detailed version

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

Case
Erde v. Carranza · No. 1:19-cv-08401
Judge
Katherine Failla
Date
May 19, 2020

Background

The plaintiffs are Susanne Erde and Michael Erde, individually as parents and natural guardians of J.E. The defendants are Richard Carranza, in his official capacity as Chancellor of the New York City Department of Education; the New York City Department of Education; and the New York State Education Department.

The opinion states that the plaintiffs had a pending motion for a preliminary injunction, which is a request for immediate court-ordered relief while a case continues. The defendants had a pending motion to dismiss, which asks the court to end the case or claims at an early stage.

New Appellate Decision

On May 18, 2020, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued a decision in Ventura de Paulino v. New York City Department of Education. The district court ordered the parties to address that decision’s effect on both pending motions.

Order

Judge Katherine Polk Failla ordered the parties to file supplemental letter briefs by June 3, 2020. This order directed additional briefing; it did not rule on the preliminary-injunction motion or the motion to dismiss.

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.