Erde v. Carranza
- Katherine Failla
- 1:19-cv-08401
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Erde v. Carranza, Judge Failla stayed the case pending the Second Circuit’s decisions on rehearing petitions.
The plaintiffs and defendants in Erde v. Carranza are affected because the court paused the case until further order and required the parties to provide notice after the Second Circuit resolves the rehearing petitions.
What happened
Erde v. Carranza concerns a case brought by Susanne Erde and Michael Erde, acting as parents and guardians of J.E., against Richard Carranza, the New York City Department of Education, and the New York State Education Department.
The court noted that the Second Circuit had issued a decision in a related case and that petitions for panel rehearing and rehearing by the full court were pending. The court stayed Erde v. Carranza until further order.
Judge Katherine Polk Failla ordered the parties to notify the court within 48 hours after the Second Circuit resolves those rehearing petitions.
The detailed version
- Erde v. Carranza · No. 1:19-cv-08401
- Katherine Failla
- June 9, 2020
Background
Susanne Erde and Michael Erde sued 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 identifies Susanne Erde and Michael Erde as acting individually and as parents and natural guardians of J.E.
The court referred to a May 18, 2020 decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in a related case. The court understood that the petitioners in that case and related cases had asked the Second Circuit to rehear the matter before the original panel and before the full court.
Ruling
The court stayed Erde v. Carranza until further order because those rehearing petitions were pending. The parties were ordered to notify the court within 48 hours after the Second Circuit resolved the petitions. The opinion does not decide the underlying claims.
Effect
The stay temporarily pauses proceedings in this case. The order does not state when the stay will end beyond providing that it remains in place until further order of the court.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.