Important — please read first
This page is informational. It is not a lawsuit and is not a recruitment page for one. No case has been filed. Submitting information does not create an attorney-client relationship and does not guarantee that a case will be brought. Any decision to file rests with counsel.
What is an Article 78 proceeding?
An Article 78 proceeding is a special proceeding in New York State Supreme Court that can examine whether a government agency:
- failed to perform a legal duty,
- acted beyond its authority,
- violated lawful procedure,
- made an error of law, or
- acted arbitrarily and capriciously or abused its discretion.
It is brought through a verified petition, supported by affidavits and other written proof. The agency ordinarily must supply the administrative record with its answer.
Timing — important and time-sensitive
The general limitations period is four months after the challenged decision becomes final and binding — or after an agency refuses a demand to perform a duty. Counsel must determine the actual triggering event for any specific award, and whether any shorter deadline, exhaustion rule, or procurement-protest requirement applies.
A court can also stay enforcement of the determination under review, which is why counsel may consider an urgent stay request if registration or implementation is imminent.
We are not posting a countdown on this page. The legally controlling date for each contested award has to be identified by counsel from the administrative record — not estimated from press coverage.
What such a proceeding may seek
- A stay or temporary pause of registration or implementation.
- Production of the administrative record.
- Review of scoring, principal input, and stated selection criteria.
- Review of whether undisclosed or irrational criteria affected decisions.
- Review of disability-access, workforce, community-impact, and transition planning.
- Annulment or reconsideration of unsupported determinations.
- Remand to DYCD for a lawful, documented review.
We do not and cannot promise that a court will restore any specific provider at any specific school.
Current status
- Counsel: The coalition is consulting attorneys. No counsel has yet committed to file. A small legal steering group is coordinating outreach.
- Evidence: Parent statements, worker statements, school letters, provider communications, and DYCD correspondence are being preserved.
- Records: Public-records requests have been drafted and are being filed; responses will be added to the evidence library as they arrive.
If you may have been harmed
Families who have already experienced concrete harm — work disruption, lost services for a child with an IEP or 504, loss of programming a family relied on in making a school choice — may submit a private legal-impact statement. This is reviewed only by the legal steering group and counsel; it is not published, and it is not sent to the public organizing list.
Please do not email full IEPs, medical records, Social Security numbers, or other highly sensitive documents. A member of the legal team will contact you if specific documents are needed and can provide a secure channel.
A web-form version of this intake, gated to the legal steering group, is being built. Until it is live, please use the email address above with a short description of your situation and your school. We will reply with next steps.
What the public campaign is doing in parallel
Article 78 is a legal track. The public campaign continues independently — letters, calls, press, and school-level organizing. You do not have to wait on litigation to act, and most families never need to be part of a court case to make their voice count.
This page is a plain-English summary, not legal advice. New York CPLR Article 78 is the controlling statute; cited timing rules (including the four-month limitations period) are general descriptions. Specific deadlines and procedural requirements for any given contract or family must be confirmed with counsel.