H.G. v. UPPER DUBLIN SCHOOL DISTRICT

Filing 41

ORDER THAT PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS ARE OVERRULED IN PART. PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED MOTION TO RECEIVE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE IS GRANTED IN PART. PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD IS DENIED. DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD IS GRANTED. THE CERK OF COURT IS DIRECTED TO MARK THIS MATTER CLOSED. SIGNED BY HONORABLE NITZA I QUINONES ALEJANDRO ON 4/17/15. 4/17/15 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(mbh, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES ,!ISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRIC OF PENNSYLVANIA 1 H.G., a minor, by and through his parent and natural guardian, BARBARA DAVIS Plaintiff IVIL ACTION 1 1 o. 13-1976 v. UPPER DUBLIN SCHOOL DISTRICT Defendant I I ORD Er AND NOW, this 17"' day of April 2015, up1l careful and independent consideration of the Report and Recommendation of United States Mtistrate Judge Lynne A. Sitarski, [ECF 37], Plaintiffs Objections thereto, [ECF 38], Defendantls response to Plaintiffs Objections, [ECF 39], and the administrative record, and consistent with the accompanying Memorandum Opinion ! filed on this day, it is hereby ORDERED that: I 1. Plaintiffs Objections are OVERRULfD, in part. 2. The Report and Recommendation is ArPROVED and ADOPTED. 2. Plaintiffs amended motion to receivl additional evidence, [ECF 36], is GRANTED, in part, to permit the Jidmission of portions of Plaintiffs Exhibit 5, [ECF 25-8], and the entiret' of Exhibits 9, 10, 19, and 22, [ECF I 26-3, 26-4, 27-3, 27-4, 27-7], and DENlIED as to all other submissions. 3. Defendant's submission of Exhibit 17,j [ECF 24-19], is DENIED. 2. Plaintiffs motion for judgment on thlll administrative record, [ECF 25], is DENIED. I 3. Defendant's motion for judgment on he administrative record, [ECF 24], . is GRANTED. 1 1 I The Clerk of Court is directed to mark this m~tter CLOSED. I BYTH COURT:

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?