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 _________________________

Impact Litigation and Advocacy The following are lawsuits in which AFC is or has been involved in bringing in order to obtain better educational services for New York City school children. D.S. v. NYCDOE AFC and Morrison and Foerster LLP have filed a class action suit on behalf of a class of students who have been illegally excluded from Boys and Girls High School. More Info J.G. v. Mills AFC, the Legal Aid Society of New York and Dewey Ballantine LLP have filed a class action suit on behalf of a class of students aged 7-21 who have a history of involvement with the juvenile or adult court systems and who are entitled to an education in New York City schools. All the plaintiffs in this action claim that upon being released from a court-ordered setting, they have been denied timely re-enrollment in New York City schools. The students claim that court-involved youth are regularly denied the opportunity to return to school or warehoused in alternative settings where court-involved youth are segregated and that do not afford them minimally adequate educational services. The complaint also contains allegations on behalf of two subclasses: court-involved youth with disabilities and class members who did not receive adequate educational services while in detention in New York City. More Info L.V. v. Department of Education Pursuant to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and New York State law, the New York City Department of Education (DOE) is required to maintain a due process hearing system whereby parents are able to challenge the actions of the Department of Education in providing special education services to their children with disabilities. In the LV case, parents of children with disabilities filed suit claiming, among other things, that they had received favorable orders and settlements in impartial hearings that were not being timely enforced. The parents also claimed that the NYC DOE does not maintain an adequate due process system and does not track and monitor enforcement of the orders. Milbank Tweed Hadley and McCloy and AFC are co-counsel. In December 2007, AFC and Milbank, on behalf of Lead Plaintiffs and the Class, entered into a settlement agreement with the DOE that provides injunctive and compensatory relief to class members. The Settlement was approved by the Honorable Richard J. Holwell at the Settlement Fairness Hearing held on April 10, 2008. More Info 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. More Info The Trilogy of Push-Out Cases: Ruiz v. Pedota, RV v. Department of Education and SG v. Department of Education In January 2003 AFC filed a lawsuit against Franklin K. Lane High School for its illegal practices in discharging students fitting the above description. Within a few weeks, the City Department of Education agreed to undertake a mailing to approximately 5,000 students who had been discharged or transferred from FKL. In this mailing, the Department explained that these students each had a right to return to school and to stay in school until the year in which they turned 21. As a consequence of this mailing, hundreds of students were offered the opportunity to reenroll at FKL High School. In the summer of 2004, Department of Education officials admitted that there was a long-standing citywide problem with schools pushing students out. The issue itself, as well as city officials' admission was covered extensively in the local press, most notably the New York Times. In the fall of 2003 AFC filed similar lawsuits against two additional individual high schools. All three of these cases were filed in federal court in the Eastern District of New York before Judge Jack B. Weinstein. More Info Jose P. v. Mills Jose P. was filed by a group of disabled New York City School children over two decades ago to force the Department of Education to obey federal laws that require appropriate evaluation, placement and services be provided to all students with disabilities. In 1979 a judgment was issued directing a variety of relief measures. Numerous subsequent orders and so-ordered stipulations have been issued since 1979. The case is filed in federal court for the Eastern District of New York. Co-counsel on the case are Roger Maldonado of Balber Pickard Battistoni Maldonado &Van Der Tuin, PC and Chip Grey, Esq. Along with co-counsel, AFC continues to monitor implementation of the Jose P. judgment and orders. More Info LIH v. Board of Education In the summer of 2000, AFC obtained a preliminary injunction directing the Department to implement provisions of the federal law protecting the rights of special education students with disabilities during summer school. More Info Ray M. v. NYC Board of Education and NYS Department of Education, et al. The Ray M. suit was brought in 1994 by New York City parents of preschool children with disabilities, and alleged that these children were denied their rights to appropriate educational services under state and federal law. One of the Ray M. claims alleged that preschoolers with disabilities were wrongfully denied timely referrals and evaluations to special education and were automatically being placed in the most restrictive classroom settings in violation of state and federal law. Another claim alleged that disabled preschool students with limited English proficiency were denied timely special education evaluations in the appropriate language and were being placed in inappropriately restrictive classroom settings. This case was filed in federal court for the Eastern District of New York. During its time, the case was extremely successful in creating new inclusive educational environments for preschool students with disabilities, who had previously been warehoused in segregated settings. More Info Boe v. NYC Board of Education, et al. Boe was brought against the NYC Board of Ed. in 1980 on behalf of suspended high school students who challenged the NYC suspension policies and procedures. More Info