Denicolo v. Board of Education of New York, 16-cv-7416 (JGK). (2020)
Court: District Court, S.D. New York
Number: infdco20200115a30
Visitors: 25
Filed: Jan. 09, 2020
Latest Update: Jan. 09, 2020
Summary: ORDER JOHN G. KOELTL , District Judge . The court has received the attached letter from the plaintiff. The letter raises two issues: First, the plaintiff seeks to correct an alleged error in a transcript in this case from June 24, 2019. The court reporter's responsibility is to prepare the transcript to the best of the reporter's ability. The certification by the court reporter attests that the court reporter has done that. There are procedures to correct transcripts. The plaintiff indica
Summary: ORDER JOHN G. KOELTL , District Judge . The court has received the attached letter from the plaintiff. The letter raises two issues: First, the plaintiff seeks to correct an alleged error in a transcript in this case from June 24, 2019. The court reporter's responsibility is to prepare the transcript to the best of the reporter's ability. The certification by the court reporter attests that the court reporter has done that. There are procedures to correct transcripts. The plaintiff indicat..
More
ORDER
JOHN G. KOELTL, District Judge.
The court has received the attached letter from the plaintiff. The letter raises two issues:
First, the plaintiff seeks to correct an alleged error in a transcript in this case from June 24, 2019. The court reporter's responsibility is to prepare the transcript to the best of the reporter's ability. The certification by the court reporter attests that the court reporter has done that. There are procedures to correct transcripts. The plaintiff indicates that she first raised a question about the transcript by a letter dated November 12, 2019, which appears to be somewhat late. In any event, if the Court reporter finds that a change in the transcript is required to reflect accurately what the reporter heard, the reporter can correct the transcript with appropriate notice to the parties.
Second, the plaintiff argues that this Court should intervene in a United States Department of Education Investigation. That request is denied. This case is now closed and, in any event, the Court would not intervene in an investigation without receiving briefing that explains how such relief is called for by the case that was pending before the Court.
SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
