NEWARK, N.J. — A federal judge has partially dismissed a lawsuit filed against the Newark Board of Education and Eagle Academy for Young Men of Newark by the father of a student with dyslexia who alleges the school failed to provide legally required educational accommodations.
The lawsuit, filed by L.F. on behalf of his minor son, J.F., claims the Newark school system failed to properly support the student’s documented learning disabilities despite years of individualized education planning and recommendations from specialists.
According to the complaint, J.F. is a student at Eagle Academy, a school within the Newark Board of Education district, and has dyslexia requiring specialized educational services and accommodations through an Individualized Education Program, commonly known as an IEP.
Court filings allege the school repeatedly failed to provide adequate accommodations and educational support. The complaint claims J.F. was placed in general education classrooms with large student-to-teacher ratios despite prior IEP recommendations for small-group instruction and individualized assistance.
The lawsuit further alleges the school placed J.F. into reading comprehension programs beyond his capabilities, preventing meaningful academic progress. Plaintiff also claims the school failed to provide assistive tools commonly used for students with dyslexia, including audiobooks, screen readers, and audio-based learning supports.
Additional allegations involve inconsistent speech and language therapy services, with school officials allegedly citing funding shortages as the reason sessions were missed or not provided. The complaint also claims special education transportation services repeatedly malfunctioned, including allegations J.F. was dropped off at the wrong school at least five times.
According to the lawsuit, a Learning Disability Teacher Consultant evaluated J.F. in December 2023 and recommended placement in an out-of-district school specifically designed for students with language-based learning disabilities. The evaluation reportedly concluded that J.F. required accommodations across all academic subjects.
The complaint states a district representative reviewed and approved the consultant’s findings and recommendations, but Plaintiff alleges the district failed to implement those recommendations despite repeated requests from J.F.’s parents.
Plaintiff also accused school officials of ignoring requests for records and IEP meetings and alleged the district artificially inflated J.F.’s grades to avoid providing additional accommodations or specialized placement.
In an opinion issued by U.S. District Judge Julien Xavier Neals, the court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss in part under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6), which govern jurisdictional and legal sufficiency challenges.
The opinion indicates portions of the complaint survived dismissal, allowing some claims to continue moving forward in federal court. However, the ruling also dismissed certain claims or portions of the lawsuit that the court found legally deficient.
