# D.F. v. Board of Education

> Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · May 9, 2006 · 180 F. App'x 232

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8448307

## Case

- **Full name:** D.F., by his Parent and Natural Guardian, Andrew Finkle v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF SYOSSET CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT James Kassebaum, both individually and in his capacity as principal of the Harry B. Thompson Middle School and Carole G. Hankin, both individually and in her capacity as superintendent of the Syosset Central School District
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
- **Decided:** May 9, 2006
- **Citations:** 180 F. App'x 232
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court
- **Judges:** Berman, Cabranes, Raggi
- **Cited by:** 13 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8448307

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that the plaintiff's "allegations of selective treatment [were] wholly conclusory ... [and] insufficient to defeat a motion to dismiss" where the plaintiff alleged "upon information and belief" that other students "who engaged in similar or more severe conduct ... rece…
- affirming, without supplementation, the district court’s conclusion that Tinker supported the school board’s suspension of a student after finding he had “threatened use and/or contemplated use of a weapon in violation of the Code of Conduct”

## Opinion text

SUMMARY ORDER
Plaintiff “D.F.,” through his father Andrew Finkle, appeals from a September 30, 2005 judgment of the District Court dismissing all of his claims against all defendants on the basis of the District Court’s September 12, 2005 Memorandum and Order, 386 F.Supp.2d 119 (E.D.N.Y.2005).
We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts and procedural history.
Substantially for the reasons stated in the thoughtful and comprehensive opinion of the District Court, we conclude that judgment for the defendants was appropriate for all claims.
We have carefully considered all of D.F.’s arguments and find them without merit. The judgment of the District Court is AFFIRMED.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8448307. Public record. Not legal advice.