Skip to main content
Federal & State Lawfederalstatelaw.com
Home/Federal/Cases
Second Circuit· 11/26/1982

Zvi D. v. Ambach

Citations

  • 694 F.2d 904
  • 8 Educ. L. Rep. 10

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that plaintiff-parent was not entitled to reimbursement from DOE where DOE explicitly limited student’s “current educational placement” to a specific school year
  • holding that plaintiff-parent was not entitled to reimbursement from DOE where DOE explicitly limited student’s “current educational placement” to a specific school year
  • “Under the [stay-put provision of the] statute, the inquiry focuses on identifying ‘the then current educational placement,’ and, further, on who should pay for it.” (emphasis added)
  • “Under the [stay-put provision of the] statute, the inquiry focuses on identifying ‘the then current educational placement,’ and, further, on who should pay for it.” (emphasis added)
  • “[I]mplicit in the maintenance of the status quo is the requirement that a school district continue to finance an educational placement made by the agency and consented to by the parent before the parent requested a due process hearing”
  • “This [pendency] provision is, in effect, an automatic preliminary injunction.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Lumbard, Oakes, Winter

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

62 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

7 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named Zvi D. v. Ambach

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

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.