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 ordered defendants to respond to plaintiffs’ letter about whether a Second Circuit decision required dismissal.
The order directly affected the plaintiffs and the named defendants by requiring the defendants to respond to the plaintiffs’ letter concerning possible dismissal of the action.
What happened
In Erde v. Carranza, the plaintiffs—Susanne Erde and Michael Erde, acting as parents and natural guardians of J.E.—sent a letter arguing that a Second Circuit decision did not require dismissing their case.
The court ordered the defendants to respond to that letter in a letter brief of no more than ten pages by July 15, 2020. The opinion did not decide whether the case should be dismissed.
Judge Katherine Polk Failla issued the order on July 6, 2020.
The detailed version
- Erde v. Carranza · No. 1:19-cv-08401
- Katherine Failla
- July 7, 2020
Background
The plaintiffs are Susanne Erde and Michael Erde, individually and 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 court received the plaintiffs’ letter dated July 2, 2020. The letter argued that the Second Circuit’s decision in Ventura de Paulino v. New York City Department of Education did not require dismissal of this action.
Order
The court ordered the defendants to respond to the plaintiffs’ July 2 letter by July 15, 2020. The response had to be a letter brief no longer than ten pages.
This order addressed only the parties’ briefing. It did not grant or deny dismissal and did not decide the underlying dispute.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.