Fiallos v. Banks
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:23-cv-09824
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Fiallos v. Banks, Judge Caproni denied a preliminary injunction seeking payments for L.V.’s private-school placement.
Alexandra Fiallos and L.V. were affected by the denial of the requested payment order; the ruling also concerned David C. Banks in his official capacity and the New York City Department of Education.
What happened
In Fiallos v. Banks, Alexandra Fiallos sought an order requiring the New York City Department of Education and David C. Banks to pay for L.V.’s attendance at iBrain during the 2023–24 school year. The Department said it had funded tuition and related services through December 31, 2023.
The court found that the request for payments through December 31 was moot because those payments had been made. For the rest of the school year, Fiallos did not provide evidence that delayed or missing payments had put L.V.’s placement at risk.
Judge Valerie Caproni denied the preliminary-injunction motion. The court also granted Fiallos’s request to extend the deadline for her reply to December 20, 2023, and said it would schedule an initial pretrial conference separately.
The detailed version
- Fiallos v. Banks · No. 1:23-cv-09824
- Valerie Caproni
- Jan. 18, 2024
Background
Alexandra Fiallos sued David C. Banks, in his official capacity as Chancellor of the New York City Department of Education, and the New York City Department of Education. She sued both as parent and natural guardian of L.V. and individually. Fiallos renewed her motion for a preliminary injunction seeking an order requiring the defendants to fund L.V.’s attendance at iBrain for the 2023–24 school year.
L.V. had a placement order under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act establishing iBrain as L.V.’s placement for that school year. The defendants represented that the Department had paid L.V.’s tuition through December 31, 2023, and had processed transportation and nursing payments through the end of that year. Fiallos nevertheless sought an order requiring payment of all outstanding amounts for the remainder of the school year.
Court’s analysis
The court explained that the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act’s “stay-put” provision automatically protects an educational placement but does not automatically require immediate payment or reimbursement. Payment-related relief may be available when a delay or failure to pay has jeopardized the child’s placement.
The court denied the request for payments through December 31, 2023, because the Department had funded the tuition and related services through that date, making that part of the request moot. The court also rejected the request for payments from January 1, 2024, through the end of the school year. Fiallos asserted that L.V. might be displaced from iBrain, but she provided no evidence supporting that assertion. The court also found that a referenced letter stating the placement “may no longer be available after November 2, 2023” did not establish that the placement had been interrupted or remained in jeopardy.
Rulings
Judge Valerie Caproni denied Fiallos’s motion for a preliminary injunction. The court separately granted Fiallos’s request to extend the deadline for her reply to December 20, 2023. The court stated that it would schedule an initial pretrial conference by separate order. The opinion also notes that the claims of the nine other parents originally joined in the complaint had been dismissed without prejudice in an earlier order.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.