Opinion · Supreme Court of the United States

Board of Ed. of City School Dist. of New York v. Tom F.

552 U.S. 1

Type: Opinion
Court: Supreme Court of the United States
Jurisdiction: Federal
Date: 2007-10-10
Topic: general

(Slip Opinion) Cite as: 552 U. S. ____ (2007) 1 Per Curiam NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the preliminary print of the United States Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Wash ington, D. C. 20543, of any typographical or other formal errors, in order that corrections may be made before the preliminary print goes to press. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES _________________ No. 06–637 _________________ BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK, PETITIONER v.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Board of Ed. of City School Dist. of New York v. Tom F.. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by: 2 opinions

(Slip Opinion)            Cite as:

552 U. S. ____

 (2007)                              1

                                     Per Curiam

       NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the
       preliminary print of the United States Reports. Readers are requested to
       notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Wash
       ington, D. C. 20543, of any typographical or other formal errors, in order
       that corrections may be made before the preliminary print goes to press.


SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
                                     _________________

                                     No. 06–637
                                     _________________


     BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE CITY SCHOOL 

        DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK, 

         PETITIONER v. TOM F., ON BEHALF OF

             GILBERT F., A MINOR CHILD

 ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF 

           APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT

                                 [October 10, 2007] 


  PER CURIAM. 

  The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court. 

  JUSTICE KENNEDY took no part in the decision of this
case.