J.L. v. New York City Department of Education et al

Filing 284

ORDER granting 283 Letter Motion for Extension of Time to File. APPLICATION GRANTED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 10/2/2023) (vfr)

Case 1:17-cv-07150-PAC-KHP Document 284
283 Filed 10/02/23
09/28/23 Page 1 of 2

10/2/2023

T HE CITY OF NEW YORK

HON. SYLVIA O. HINDS-RADIX
Corporation Counsel

LAW DEPARTMENT
100 CHURCH STREET
NEW YORK, NY 10007

PHILIP S. FRANK
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
(not for service)

September 28, 2023
By ECF
Honorable Katharine H. Parker
United States District Court
Southern District of New York
500 Pearl Street
New York, New York 10007

10/2/2023

Re: J.L., et al. v. NYC Dep’t of Education, et ano.,
No. 17-CV-7150 (PAC) (KHP)
Your Honor:
I am the Assistant Corporation Counsel in the Office of the Corporation Counsel of
the City of New York assigned to represent Defendants the New York City Department of
Education (“DOE”) and DOE Chancellor David C. Banks in the above-referenced matter, in which
Plaintiffs, parents on behalf of three students, allege that their rights were violated due to alleged
systemic delays in providing coordinated nursing, transportation, and porter services.
I write to respectfully request a brief, one-week extension of time, from October 6,
2023 until October 13, 2023, for Defendants to serve and file their cross-motion for summary
judgment and opposition to Plaintiffs’ motion. This is Defendants’ third request for an extension,
and the Court granted Defendants’ previous two requests.
The good cause for the requested extension is that I have been out sick and unable
to work during multiple days this past week as the result of having COVID-19 symptoms, as well
as caretaking for my two young children, both of whom are sick and quarantining, as one of them
recently tested positive for COVID. Being out sick has prevented me from completing the work
on the motion papers that I had anticipated accomplishing this week. The brief one-week extension
of time, therefore, will enable me to finalize the drafting of the motion papers.

Case 1:17-cv-07150-PAC-KHP Document 284
283 Filed 10/02/23
09/28/23 Page 2 of 2

Plaintiffs’ counsel object to the instant request “given the multiple prior requests
for, and grants of, extensions.” Plaintiffs, however, will not be prejudiced by the brief, one-week
extension, and Plaintiffs’ own delays belie any claim of prejudice. Indeed, Plaintiffs effectively
received a six-and-a-half-month extension to serve and file their motion papers, when Plaintiffs
failed to meet their first deadline to file their motion papers and failed to seek an extension from
the Court. (See Court Order dated March 21, 2023 (ECF No. 235), noting that Plaintiffs had not
filed their motion by the past-due deadline.) The requested extension also will not affect the oral
argument scheduled for December 7, 2023, at 10:00 a.m.
Accordingly, Defendants respectfully request that the Court grant a brief, one-week
extension of time, until October 13, 2023, for Defendants to serve and file their cross-motion for
summary judgment and opposition to Plaintiffs’ motion. Defendants also respectfully request a
corresponding extension of the briefing schedule as follows:
•

Defendants’ cross-motion for summary judgment and opposition to
Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgement: October 13, 2023;

•

Plaintiffs’ reply and opposition to Defendants’ cross-motion: November 10,
2023; and

•

Defendants’ reply: December 1, 2023

I thank the Court for its consideration of the within.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/
Philip S. Frank
Assistant Corporation Counsel
cc:

All counsel (via ECF)

-2-