A.S., on behalf of minor child, M.S. v. Board of Education of the Borough of Mount Ephraim, Camden County, 10/24/25 (#507-25)

507-25
OAL Dkt. No. EDU 07925-25
Agency Dkt. No. 108-4/25
New Jersey Commissioner of Education
Final Decision
A.S., on behalf of minor child, M.S.,
Petitioner,
v.
Board of Education of the Borough of Mount
Ephraim, Camden County,
Respondent.
The record of this matter and the Initial Decision of the Office of Administrative Law (OAL) have
been reviewed and considered. The parties did not file exceptions.
Upon review, the Commissioner concurs with the ALJ that challenges to a district’s residency
determination based on the “family crisis” exemption must first be appealed to the executive county
superintendent (ECS). Because petitioner has not appealed to the ECS, this matter must be dismissed.
Accordingly, the Initial Decision is adopted as the final decision in this matter, and the petition of
appeal is hereby dismissed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.1
COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION
Date of Decision: 	October 24, 2025
Date of Mailing: 	October 27, 2025
1 This decision may be appealed to the Appellate Division of the Superior Court pursuant to N.J.S.A. 18A:6-9.1. Under
N.J.Ct.R. 2:4-1(b), a notice of appeal must be filed with the Appellate Division within 45 days from the date of mailing
of this decision.

New Jersey is an Equal Opportunity Employer
INITIAL DECISION
OAL DKT. NO. EDU 07925-25
AGENCY DKT. NO. 108-4/25
A.S., ON BEHALF OF MINOR CHILD, M.S.,
Petitioner,
v.
BOROUGH OF MOUNT EPHRAIM BOARD
OF EDUCATION, CAMDEN COUNTY,
Respondent.
Michael Goryelov, Esq., for petitioner (Denbeaux & Denbeaux, attorneys)
Costadinos J. Georgiou, Esq., for respondent (Lenox, Socey, Formidoni,
Giordano, Lang, Carrigg & Casey, LLC, attorneys)
Record Closed: July 22, 2025 Decided: August 11, 2025
BEFORE SUSAN MCCABE, ALJ:
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
On April 16, 2025, petitioner, A.S., appealed respondent’s residency determination
to the Commissioner of the New Jersey Department of Education based on the “family
crisis” exemption. Petitioner, however, did not first appeal the determination to the
executive county superintendent. Must this case be dismissed? Yes. Challenges to a
State of New Jersey
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 07925-25
2
school district’s residency determination based upon the “family crisis” exemption must
first be appealed to the executive county superintendent. N.J.A.C. 6A:22-3.2(h)(4)(i)–(iii).
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On April 10, 2025, the chief school administrator for the Mount Ephraim Public
School District issued a preliminary notice of eligibility to petitioner, which notified her that
her minor child, M.S., and his sibling were no longer eligible to attend school within the
Mount Ephraim school district’s educational system. The chief school administrator
based his determination on the family’s residential relocation to an out-of-district
township. On April 16, 2025, petitioner appealed the determination to the Commissioner
based on the “family crisis” exemption to the regulation governing residential eligibility to
attend a specific school district in New Jersey. (Respondent’s Brief in Support of Motion
to Dismiss, Ex. A.)
On April 17, 2025, the Office of Controversies and Disputes transmitted the case
to the Office of Administrative Law as a contested case under the OAL Administrative
Procedure Act. N.J.S.A. 52:14B-1 et seq.
On April 29, 2025, respondent filed a motion to dismiss instead of an answer. On
July 8, 2025, petitioner filed her opposition to the motion. On July 22, 2025, I held oral
argument and closed the record.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Based upon the papers submitted in support of and in opposition to respondent’s
motion to dismiss, and assuming all the allegations contained in the petition of appeal are
true, I FIND the following as FACT for purposes of this motion only:
M.S. is a seven-year-old boy who had been attending school in Mount Ephraim,
New Jersey, since he was school-aged. M.S. resided in Mount Ephraim from birth until
April 1, 2025, when he and his family moved to Clementine, New Jersey. M.S. was in
second grade at the time and remained in the Mount Ephraim school system until the

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 07925-25
3
academic year ended. (Petitioner’s Opposition to Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss,
Certification of A.S.)
Financial problems compelled petitioner to move from Mount Ephraim to
Clementine. First, petitioner lost her job during COVID. Second, in June 2022, the family
home in which petitioner had been raised fell into foreclosure, and petitioner retained
counsel to represent her in the foreclosure proceedings. Petitioner’s job loss and
foreclosure proceedings, coupled with her father’s passing and her husband’s illness,
resulted in extreme financial hardship that forced her to sell the family home in March
2025. On April 1, 2025, the family moved to Clementine. (Ibid.)
On April 10, 2025, petitioner received Mount Ephraim’s preliminary notice of
ineligibility and contacted Mount Ephraim’s superintendent, who denied her request to
allow M.S. to finish the school year with his class. Petitioner became confused about how
to appeal the school district’s determination because the instructions contained in the
appeal form, which the superintendent provided her and which she followed, instructed
her to appeal the school district’s determination to the Commissioner. As a result,
petitioner completed the form and filed it with the Commissioner. (Ibid.)
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
A respondent may file a motion to dismiss instead of an answer to a petition if “the
petitioner has advanced no cause of action even if the petitioner’s factual allegations are
accepted as true or for lack of jurisdiction, failure to prosecute, or other good reason.”
N.J.A.C. 6A:3-1.10; N.J.A.C. 6A:3-1.5(g).
Any challenge to a school district’s residency determination based on the “family
crisis” exemption, however, must first be appealed to the executive county
superintendent. N.J.A.C. 6A:22-3.2(h)(4)(i)–(iii). A petitioner may thereafter appeal the
executive county superintendent’s determination to the Commissioner. N.J.A.C. 6A:22-
3.2(h)(8). A petitioner may not first appeal to the Commissioner.

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 07925-25
4
In this case, petitioner first appealed the school district’s residency determination
based on the “family crisis” exemption to the Commissioner. She did not first appeal to
the executive county superintendent. Nevertheless, petitioner argues that this regulation
should not apply to her because she was given conflicting advice.
More specifically, petitioner argues that the school district’s superintendent
advised her to use the pro se residency appeal form, which is for appeals to the
Commissioner, not for appeals to the executive county superintendent. Second,
petitioner argues that the preliminary notice of ineligibility advised her to “request a
hearing before the Mt. Ephraim Board of Education,” not the executive county
superintendent. As such, petitioner concludes that she merely followed instructions when
she appealed to the Commissioner.
While I understand why petitioner made her mistake, such misunderstanding does
not excuse it. In other words, I have no authority to disregard the regulation at issue in
this case no matter how understandable the mistake may be. Fortunately, no regulation
prevents petitioner from now filing her petition of appeal with the executive county
superintendent. Until then, neither the Commissioner nor I have jurisdiction to hear this
case. As such, I CONCLUDE that petitioner filed her petition in violation of N.J.A.C.
6A:22-3.2(h)(4)(i)–(iii), that no cause of action exists to advance, and that this case must
be dismissed.
ORDER
Given my findings of fact and conclusions of law, I ORDER that respondent’s
motion to dismiss this case is GRANTED, and that this case is DISMISSED WITHOUT
PREJUDICE.
I hereby FILE this initial decision with the COMMISSIONER OF THE
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION for consideration.
This recommended decision may be adopted, modified, or rejected by the
COMMISSIONER OF THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, who by law is authorized

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 07925-25
5
to make a final decision in this matter. If the Commissioner of the Department of
Education does not adopt, modify, or reject this decision within forty-five days and unless
such time limit is otherwise extended, this recommended decision shall become a final
decision in accordance with N.J.S.A. 52:14B-10.
Within thirteen days from the date on which this recommended decision was
mailed to the parties, any party may file written exceptions with the COMMISSIONER OF
THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION. Exceptions may be filed by email to
ControversiesDisputesFilings@doe.nj.gov or by mail to Office of Controversies
and Disputes, 100 Riverview Plaza, 4th Floor, PO Box 500, Trenton, New Jersey
08625-0500. A copy of any exceptions must be sent to the judge and to the other parties.
August 11, 2025
DATE SUSAN MCCABE, ALJ
Date Received at Agency:
Date Mailed to Parties:
SM/dc/gd

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 07925-25
6
APPENDIX
EXHIBITS
For petitioner
Brief in Opposition to respondent’s Motion to Dismiss with Exhibits
For respondent
Brief in Support of Motion to Dismiss with Exhibits