TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Suzanne Benoit v. Andrew Jenkins

Benoit v. Jenkins, 861 F.2d 1290 (D.C. Cir. 1988)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
November 10, 1988
Docket
No. 88-7044
Citations
861 F.2d 1290274 U.S. App. D.C. 951988 WL 1210241988 U.S. App. LEXIS 18773
Status
Unpublished

Opinion

861 F.2d 1290 274 U.S.App.D.C. 95

Unpublished Disposition NOTICE: D.C. Circuit Local Rule 11(c) states that unpublished orders, judgments, and explanatory memoranda may not be cited as precedents, but counsel may refer to unpublished dispositions when the binding or preclusive effect of the disposition, rather than its quality as precedent, is relevant. Suzanne BENOIT, Appellant, v. Andrew JENKINS.

No. 88-7044.

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.

Nov. 10, 1988.

Before RUTH B. GINSBURG, SILBERMAN and D.H. GINSBURG, Circuit Judges.

JUDGMENT

PER CURIAM.

1

This case was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and was briefed and argued by counsel. The court has determined that decision of the appeal occasions no need for a published opinion. See D.C.Cir.R. 14(c).

2

In its opinion the district court stated that Suzanne Benoit "was not reasonably available to DCPS during December 1983 and January 1984." Plaintiff has suggested that this statement conflicts with the hearing officer's finding that "Suzanne was at home from the end of December through the 13th of January." As we read the district court's statement, the court's conclusion that Suzanne "was not reasonably available" to DCPS is compatible with the hearing officer's ultimate determination that Suzanne "was unavailable to DCPS personnel for a significant portion of the 60 day timeline required by Mills...."

3

Accordingly, we cannot gainsay the district court's dispositive ruling: To qualify for reimbursement, "the parent must have made the child reasonably available for evaluation by the public school system"; "[t]he parent here did not do so and thus relief must be denied." Therefore, based on the above-quoted reasons stated in the district court's January 5, 1988 Memorandum, it is 4

ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the judgment from which this appeal has been taken be affirmed.

5

The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after disposition of any timely petition for rehearing. See D.C.Cir.R. 15(b)(2).

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 0 cases

No case in this database cites this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list