Success Stories About Us Mission Statement Staff Board of Directors Junior Board 04-05 Annual Report Job and Volunteer Opportunities Funders Pro Bono AFC's Pro Bono Partners Pro Bono Opportunities for Attorneys Donate Contact Us Privacy Policy Our Work Overview AFC Services Projects Litigation D.S. v NYC DOE J.G. v Mills L.V. v DOE E.B. v DOE Push-Out Trilogy Jose P. v Mills LIH v BOE Ray M. v NYC BOE BOE v NYC BOE Resources for Parents Parent Guides AFC Services Dept. of Ed. Contacts Referral List Links Contact Us Resources for Professionals Policy Reports Litigation Dept. of Ed. Contacts Contact Us Publications Parent Guides Policy Reports Brochures Newsletters Press Room AFC in the News Request an Interview Press Releases Contact Us Ways To Help DONATE DIRECTLY DONATE BY SEARCHING OR SHOPPING DONATE IN HONOR OF _________________________

E.B. v. Department of Education Along with the firm of Davis Polk and Wardwell, Advocates for Children represents the class of all children with disabilities who have been excluded from school without proper notice and due process. The suit alleges, among other things, that the Department regularly suspends, expels, transfers and otherwise excludes student with disabilities from its programs without providing them and their parents adequate notice as is legally required and, in so doing, denies them the free appropriate public education to which they are entitled under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. The case is pending in federal court in the Eastern District of New York before Judge Charles P. Sifton and Magistrate Judge Marilyn D. Go. Although a class of plaintiffs was certified in the summer of 2004, the Department has chosen to aggressively litigate its position that the class of students in this case is overbroad. The Department is likely seeking to narrow the scope of the class because, as it is currently defined, the numbers of children in the class could be in the thousands. In order to address this widespread problem, the Department would need to undertake a substantial reconstruction of the way in which it handles students who fall into these categories. Status as of November 2005: Selected Documents: Third Amended Complaint in E.B. v. DOE - July 15, 2003 Decision Denying Defendants' Motion to Dismiss - January 26, 2004 Decision Granting Plaintiffs' Motion to Certify a Class - August 17, 2004 Plaintiffs' Response to Defendants' Motion to Amend - March 2, 2005 Defendants' Motion to Narrow the Scope of the Class - March 9, 2005 Judge's Decision Regarding Scope of Class - June 29, 2005