Skip to main content

Decision No. 18,181

Appeal of ROBERT and KRISTEN PODLAS, on behalf of their children, from action of the Board of Education of the Orchard Park Central School District regarding residency.

Decision No. 18,181

(August 18, 2022)

Webster Szanyi, LLP, attorneys for respondent, Melanie J. Beardsley, Esq., of counsel

ROSA., Commissioner.--Petitioners appeal a determination of the Board of Education of the Orchard Park Central School District (“respondent”) that their children (the “students”) are not district residents entitled to attend the district’s schools tuition-free.  The appeal must be dismissed.

Given the disposition of this appeal, a complete recitation of the facts is unnecessary.  The students previously attended respondent’s schools as district residents.  Respondent excluded the students as non-residents as of January 1, 2022.  This appeal ensued.  Petitioner’s request for interim relief was denied on January 3, 2022.

Petitioners seek a determination that the students are residents of the district and are entitled to attend the district’s schools tuition-free.

The appeal must be dismissed as moot.  The Commissioner will only decide matters in actual controversy and will not render a decision on a state of facts that no longer exists due to the passage of time or a change in circumstances (Appeal of Sutton, 57 Ed Dept Rep, Decision No. 17,331; Appeal of a Student with a Disability, 48 id. 532, Decision No. 15,940; Appeal of M.M., 48 id. 527, Decision No. 15,937; see Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707, 714 [1980]).  Where the Commissioner can no longer award a petitioner meaningful relief on his or her claims, no live controversy remains and the appeal must be dismissed (Appeal of R.B., 57 Ed Dept Rep, Decision No. 17,394; Appeal of N.C., 40 id. 445, Decision No. 14,522). 

Following the initiation of this appeal, respondent informed my Office of Counsel that it “re-enrolled the students beginning January 10, 2022” after petitioner Kristen Podlas “returned to her [in-district] residence.”  Therefore, petitioners have been afforded complete relief by the district and the appeal must be dismissed.

THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED.

END OF FILE