K.R., on behalf of minor child, I.R. v. Wayne Township Board of Education, Passaic County, 6/24/26 (#219-26E)

219-26E
OAL Dkt. No. EDU 10015-26
Agency Dkt. No. 263-06-26
New Jersey Commissioner of Education
Final Decision
K.R., on behalf of minor child, I.R.,
Petitioner,
v.
Wayne Township Board of Education, Passaic
County,
Respondent.
The record of this emergent matter and the recommended decision of the Administrative Law
Judge (ALJ) have been reviewed and considered.
Upon review, the Commissioner concurs with the ALJ that petitioner has failed to demonstrate
entitlement to emergent relief pursuant to the standards enunciated in Crowe v. DeGioia, 90 N.J. 126,
132-34 (1982), and codified at N.J.A.C. 6A:3-1.6.
Accordingly, the decision denying petitioner’s application for emergent relief is adopted. Because
petitioner advised the ALJ during oral argument that she does not wish to pursue any underlying issues
now that the question of graduation has been resolved, no further proceedings are necessary.
IT IS SO ORDERED. 1
COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION
Date of Decision: 	June 24, 2026
Date of Mailing: 	June 24, 2026
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
State of New Jersey
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
ORDER
EMERGENT RELIEF
OAL DKT. NO. EDU 10015-2026
AGENCY DKT. NO. 263-06-26
K.R. O/B/O MINOR CHILD I.R.,
Petitioner,
v.
WAYNE TOWNSHIP BOARD OF EDUCATION,
Respondent.
______________________________________
K.R., petitioner, pro se
John Comegno, Esq., for respondent Wayne Township Board of Education
(Comegno Law Group, attorney)
Record Closed: June 24, 2026 Decided: June 24, 2026
BEFORE BINDI MERCHANT, ALJ:
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Petitioner K.R. seeks emergent relief after I.R. was barred from participating in
graduation by respondent, Wayne Township Board of Education’s (Board) for failing to
meet attendance and credit requirements. Should I.R. be permitted to attend and
participate in the twelfth-grade graduation ceremony scheduled for June 24, 2026? No,
participation in graduation is a privilege, not a right. The Board’s action to deny I.R. was
not arbitrary, capricious, or unreasonable

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 10015- 26
2
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On May 28, 2026, the Attendance Review Committee (ARC) determined that I.R.
would not receive credit for English, among other classes, and advised her that she would
be unable to graduate and walk at graduation.
On June 22, 2026, the Department of Education transferred this case to the Office
of Administrative Law for resolution of the emergent application and to file the contested
case under the Administrative Procedure Act, N.J.S.A. 52:14B-1 to -15, and the act
establishing the OAL, N.J.S.A. 52:14F-1 to -13, for a hearing under the Uniform
Administrative Procedure Rules, N.J.A.C. 1:1-1.1 to -21.6.
On June 24, 2026, I conducted the hearing and I closed the record At the hearing,
K.R. confirmed that this decision is fully dispositive of the issues K.R. raised in her petition
and that the matter can be dismissed following this determination.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Based on the oral arguments and documents presented by the parties, I FIND the
following as FACT for purposes of this application only:
1. I.R. is a twelfth-grade student attending Wayne Hills High School.
2. I.R. has not met the attendance and credit requirements to receive a New
Jersey sponsored high school diploma from respondent.
3. Board Policy 5200 provides that “[p]rolonged or repeated absences,
excused or unexcused, from school or from class, deprive students of the
educational and classroom experiences deemed essential to learning and
may result in retention at grade level or loss of credit or removal from a
course that would count toward the high school diploma in accordance with
policies of this Board.”
4. Board Regulation 5200 sets the absence threshold: “[a] high school student
may be dropped from a course or denied course credit when the student
has been absent from school more than 13 days, in a full year course, more

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 10015- 26
3
than 9 days in Physical Education, more than 6 days in a half-year course,
or more than 3 days in a quarter year course (whatever the reason for the
absence, except that absences for the observation of a NJDOE approved
religious holiday, “Take Our Children to Work Day,”, college visits,
attendance to a civic event, or absences caused by a student’s suspension
will not count toward the total.
5. Board Policy 5410 provides that “[s]chool attendance shall be a factor in the
determination of a pupil's promotion or retention.Only extenuating
circumstances should permit the promotion of a pupil who has been in
attendance fewer than …one hundred sixty days during the school year for
grades nine through twelve.
6. Board Policy 5600, bestows the Board with the authority to “deny
participation in extra-curricular activities, school functions, sports,
graduation exercises, or other privileges as disciplinary sanctions when
designed to maintain the order and integrity of the school environment, in
accordance with N.J.A.C. 6A:16-7.1(d).”
7. I.R. accumulated 71 absences in English; 79 absences in Foundations of
Graphic Design; 56 absences in Into to Visual Arts; 39 absences in Work-
Based Learning; and 18 absences in Physical Education.
8. In February 2026, respondent met with K.R. to inform him that I.R. had
accumulated 35 absences.
9. On March 9, 2026, respondent emailed K.R. an update on I.R.’s attendance
to express concern that from their prior meeting in February, I.R. had now
a total of 49 absences and that was significantly impacting her ability to earn
credit for English. Respondent offered support and requested additional
doctor notices or documentation, if any.
10. Respondent established an Attendance Review Committee (Committee),
made up of nurses, teachers, school counselors, CST members, and
administrators, to review any students’ attendance throughout the district,
at which time parents and students submit any evidence of extenuating
circumstances, in order to make determinations with relation to credit
recovery of credit lost.

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 10015- 26
4
11. On May 27, 2026, the Committee met to consider I.R.’s absences and
review whether extenuating circumstances existed to determine whether
she should receive credit for classes where she had multiple absences.
12. Notes from I.R.’s therapeutic chiropractor were provided, but they did not
have any dates or a diagnosis/treatment plan. The Committee found that
the number of absences far outweighed the noted provided by the
chiropractor.
13. On May 28, 2026, respondent informed petitioners that waived the
Committee waived the attendance requirements for Work-Based Learning
and PE, however, it did not waive the attendance requirements for English,
Foundations of Graphic Design, and Introduction to Visual Arts.
14. I.R. was given the opportunity to restore the credit lost by attending and
successfully completing, with a passing grade, and approved
SummerSchool class for the class in which the credit was denied.
15. Petitioners were also advised that I.R. would not be able to participate in
graduation ceremony and must attend summer school to obtain a diploma.
16. On June 3. 2026, upon review of petitioner’s request for reconsideration,
respondent advised that due to the high number of accumulated absences,
I.R. could not participate in graduation ceremony.
17. On June 23, 2026, in response to petitioner’s request for clarification of the
attendance policy, respondent advised that I.R. failed both English and Art
due to absences, that she accumulated over 50 absences in both English
and Art, and the limit is 13.
18. Respondent advised that all doctor’s notes were taken into careful
consideration by the Committee, but the Committee could not justify the
number of absences or the 109 times I.R. was late to school.

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 10015- 26
5
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
N.J.A.C. 6A:3-1.6(b) sets forth the standards governing motions for emergent
relief. The regulation instructs in salient part:
A motion for a stay or emergent relief shall be accompanied by a letter memorandum or
brief which shall address the following standards be met for granting such relief pursuant
to Crowe v. DeGioia, 90 N.J. 126 (1982):
1. The respondent will suffer irreparable harm if the
requested relief is not granted;
2. The legal right underlying respondent’s claim is settled;
3. The petitioner has the likelihood of prevailing on the merits
of the underlying claim; and
4. When the equities and interests of the parties are
balanced, the petitioner will suffer greater harm than the
respondent will suffer if the requested relief is not granted.
Petitioners have the burden of establishing each of the above requirement warrant relief
in her favor.
It is well settled that relief should not be granted except “when necessary to prevent
irreparable harm.” Crowe, 90 N.J. at 132. In this regard, harm is generally considered
irreparable if it cannot be adequately redressed by monetary damages. Id. at 132-33. In
other words, it has been described as “‘substantial injury to a material degree coupled
with the inadequacy of money damages.’” Judice’s Sunshine Pontiac, Inc. v. General
Motors Corp., 418 F. Supp. 1212, 1218 (D.N.J. 1976) (citation omitted). Harm is
irreparable when there can be no adequate after the fact remedy in law or in equity; or
where monetary damages cannot adequately restore a lost experience. C.D. v. Mainland
Regional Bd. of Educ. 2017 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 389 (June 16, 2017).
The opportunity to participate in the graduation ceremony that, once missed, cannot be
regained since it is a once in a lifetime event. K.H. o/b/o M.G. v. Kingsway Regional Bd.
of Educ., EDS 6903-11, Decision on Emergent Relief (June 17, 2011)

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 10015- 26
6
Numerous cases hold that participation in a graduation ceremony and other school
activities is a privilege and not a right. See A.D. v. Town of West New York Bd. of Educ.,
Hudson County, 2016 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 522 (OAL Docket No. EDU 09030-16); see also
D.S. o/b/o D.C. v. Board of Educ. of Parsippany Troy Hills, OAL Docket No. EDU-90055-
06, 96 N.J.A.R. 2d (EDU) 697 (June 14, 1996). Of course, “there is no adequate after-
the-fact remedy that can adequately redress the intangibles of a lost experience after the
event is over.” A.D., 2016 N.J. AGEN LEXIS, *4.
Here, K.R. claims that I.R.’s inability to walk at graduation indeed would cause
irreparable harm, since monetary damages cannot adequately redress the inability to
walk at graduation with her peers. As such, I CONCLUDE that K.R. has satisfied the
burden as to irreparable harm.
Although K.R. demonstrates that I.R. will suffer irreparable harm, K.R. has failed
to demonstrate that law is well-settled in her favor, that she has a likelihood of success
on the merits, or that I.R. will suffer greater harm than the Board will suffer if the Board’s
decision is reversed. To the contrary, the law is well settled in favor of the Board on this
issue, which has broad discretion to take actions needed to effectively operate its schools
and establish policies to govern attendance.
The New Jersey Department of Education has adopted regulations requiring
boards of education to develop, adopt, and implement requirements for a State endorsed
diploma. N.J.A.C. 6A:8-5.1 and -8-52. Local graduation requirements must include at
last twenty credits in English and local attendance requirements. N.J.A.C. 6A:8-
5.1(a)(1)(i) and – (a)(3). Local boards of education are also responsible for protecting the
health, safety and welfare of their students and ensuring the orderly conduct of the
academic process. Goss v. Lopez, 419 U.S. 565, 95 S. Ct. 729, 42 L. Ed. 2d 725 (1975).
Toward this end, local boards are charged with establishing policies for student
attendance, which include consequences for a student’s failure to comply with that policy.
N.J.A.C. 6A:16-7.6. It has been consistently held that participation in graduation is a
privilege and not a right. C.D. o/b/o S.C. v Mainland, 2017 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 389 (June
16, 2017). It is equally settled that actions within a school board’s authority, including
establishing policies for student attendance, are entitled to a presumption of validity and

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 10015- 26
7
will not be overturned, absent a showing that the decision was arbitrary, without rational
basis or induced by improper motives. Kopera v. West Orange Bd. of Education, 60 N.J.
Super. 288, 294 (App. Div 1960).
Based on the documents submitted by the parties and having considered the
arguments made, K.R. has failed to demonstrate that I.R. has a right to attend graduation
and that the decision to disallow her credit for her English class and graduate with her
class is arbitrary, capricious or unreasonable. K.R. has not shown that the decision is
without a rational basis or induced by improper motives.
Quite the opposite, there is a long-standing history of absenteeism in this case.
While this Court recognizes that I.R. has faced significant challenges, including having to
deal with the loss of her older sister and bullying, respondent advised petitioners several
times that I.R. had excessive absences that placed her in danger of not graduating for
missing English and other classes multiple times. Despite this notice, I.R. 71 days of her
English class, and similar absences in other classes, violating the respondent’s policy of
no more than thirteen absences. The record is devoid of any evidence establishing that
petitioner would be successful in prevailing on the merits of the underlying claim – that
she should be granted credit for her English class, obtain her diploma, and graduate with
her class.
Finally, in balancing the equities and interests of the parties, the respondent’s
absenteeism policy should be enforced over allowing I.R. to graduate when she failed to
attend class on multiple occasions. I.R.’s inability to participate in graduation does not
rise to the severity of harm to warrant overruling the clearly enunciated policies of the
school district that failure to comply with the attendance requirements of the school district
will result in a student’s exclusion from the graduation ceremony The respondent has a
substantial interest in making sure children attend school and allowing I.R. to graduate
when she clearly did not attend school for a significant part of the year would “undermine
the respondent’s authority that would have a far-reaching effect on the school district in
its dealing with students.” C.D. o/b/o S.C. v. Mainland Regional Bd. of Educ., at *15.
Respondent argues that they apply their policy equally to every student enrolled in their
District.

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 10015- 26
8
To their knowledge, at least for the past 10 years, Wayne Hills High School no
student has been provided accommodations during the days leading up to the graduation
ceremony in order to recover credit lost from excessive absences.
On balance, this interest significantly outweighs the harm A.S. will suffer from not being
granted credit for her English class and not participating in graduation
Based on the foregoing, petitioner has failed to satisfy three of the four prongs
required to be entitled to the emergent relief sought. Therefore, I CONCLUDE
petitioner is not entitled to the emergency relief and the request for emergent relief is
denied. I additionally CONCLUDE that there are no further issues to be resolved as the
request for emergent relief pertained only to I.R.’s participation in the graduation
ceremony.
ORDER
Given my Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, I ORDER that petitioner’s
request for emergency relief is DENIED, and that this case is DISMISSED.
This order on application for emergency relief may be adopted, modified or
rejected by the COMMISSIONER OF THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, who by law
is authorized to make a final decision in this matter. The final decision shall be issued
without undue delay, but no later than forty-five days following the entry of this order. If
the Commissioner of the Department of Education does not adopt, modify or reject this
order within forty-five days, this recommended order shall become a final
June 24, 2026 _____________________________
BINDI MERCHANT, ALJ
June 24, 2026__________________
June 24, 2026__________________
DATE
Date Emailed to Agency:
Date Emailed to Parties:
ke

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 10015- 26
9
APPENDIX
EXHIBITS
For Petitioner
Petition and Motion for Emergent Relief dated June 22, 2026, with exhibits
Reply dated June 24, 2026, to Respondent’s Opposition with exhibits
For Respondent
Opposition dated June 24, 2026, to petitioner’s application with exhibits.