Skip to main content
· 7/17/2006

Laster v. District of Columbia

Citations

  • 439 F. Supp. 2d 93
  • 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47980
  • 2006 WL 1982291

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • noting that if the stay-put provision applies, “injunctive relief is available without the traditional showing of irreparable harm”
  • collecting cases and noting “courts have consistently interpreted the stay-put provision to be an automatic injunction.”
  • “Because a preliminary injunction may be unlimited in duration, notice to adverse parties is required.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Urbina

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.