Piazza v. Florida Union Free School District

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that plaintiffs are required to exhaust their remedies with respect to each school year in the complaint
• noting that “the IDEA is silent” regarding the limitations period governing unexhausted IDEA claims brought directly in federal court
• noting that the court may take notice of state court decisions “to determine what statements [the documents] contain[,] not for the truth of the matters asserted” (some alterations and all quotation marks omitted
• noting it is Plaintiffs’ burden to establish the applicability of exceptions
• “Although the Complaint does not mention the [state review officer] Decision, the Court may consider it as a matter of judicial notice.”
• “Plaintiffs must satisfy the IDEA’s exhaustion requirement with respect to each school year discussed in their Complaint.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

7 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Barnes v. County of Monroe
  W.D. New York· 2015-02-10· cited 27×
• Frank v. Sachem School District
  E.D. New York· 2015-02-05· cited 18×
• Thyssenkrupp Materials NA, Inc. v. M/V Kacey
  S.D. New York· 2017-02-16· cited 11×
• R.S. v. Bedford Central School District
  S.D. New York· 2012-10-02· cited 8×
• B.C. ex rel. B.M. v. Pine Plains Central School District
  S.D. New York· 2013-09-06· cited 8×
• D.A.B. ex rel. D.B. v. New York City Department of Education
  S.D. New York· 2014-09-22· cited 6×
• Donus ex rel. Donus v. Garden City Union Free School District
  E.D. New York· 2013-12-12· cited 1×