E.M., on behalf of minor children, E.B. and Z.B. v. Board of Education of the Township of Mount Olive, Morris County, 5/23/25 (#269-25R)

269-25R
OAL Dkt. No. EDU 07408-24
Agency Dkt. No. 127-5/24
New Jersey Commissioner of Education
Final Decision
E.M., on behalf of minor children, E.B. and Z.B.,
Petitioner,
v.
Board of Education of the Township of Mount
Olive, Morris 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 Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) that
petitioner failed to sustain her burden of establishing that her children, E.B. and Z.B., were
domiciled in the Mount Olive school district between December 1, 2023, and the end of the 2023-
2024 school year. The Commissioner also concurs with the ALJ that the children were, therefore,
not entitled to a free public education in the district during this time period. N.J.S.A. 18A:38-1(a).
Pursuant to N.J.S.A. 18A:38-1(b), the Commissioner shall assess tuition against petitioner
for the time period during which the minor children were ineligible to attend school in the district.
Tuition is “computed on the basis of 1/180 of the total annual per pupil cost to the local district
multiplied by the number of days of ineligible attendance.” N.J.S.A. 18A:38-1(b).

2
The Board’s counterclaim sought tuition for E.B. of $13,666.95 ($112.95/day x 121 days
of ineligible attendance) and transportation costs for Z.B. of $2100 ($300 per month x 7 months),
and the ALJ ordered that said amount be assessed to petitioner. However, the record does not
contain a supporting certification from the Board’s Business Administrator or other district
employee regarding the per diem rate or the number of days of ineligible attendance.1 Without
sufficient proofs, the Commissioner is unable to assess tuition against petitioner at this time.
Accordingly, the matter is remanded to the OAL for further proceedings to develop the
factual record regarding the per diem rate and the number of days of ineligible attendance.2
IT IS SO ORDERED.
COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION
Date of Decision: 	May 23, 2025
Date of Mailing: 	May 27, 2025
1 The record indicates that petitioner transferred the children out of the Mount Olive school district on
June 3, 2024, when the family relocated to Florida.
2 If Board witnesses testified regarding the per diem rate and the number of days of ineligible attendance
for each child, the ALJ may update the Initial Decision on remand to reflect this information without the
need to obtain a certification from the Board.

New Jersey is an Equal Opportunity Employer
State of New Jersey
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
INITIAL DECISION
OAL DKT. NO. EDU 07408-24
AGENCY DKT. NO. 127-5/24
E.M. ON BEHALF OF MINOR
CHILDREN, E.B. and Z.B.,
Petitioner,
v.
TOWNSHIP OF MOUNT OLIVE BOARD
OF EDUCATION, MORRIS COUNTY,
Respondent.
__________________________________
No appearance by E.M., petitioner, pro se
John G. Geppert, Jr., Esq., for respondent (Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC, attorneys)
Record Closed: February 7, 2025 Decided: April 29, 2025
BEFORE DANIEL J. BROWN, ALJ:
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
The petitioner, parent of minor children, E.B. and Z.B., challenges the respondent’s
residency determination. In its counterclaim, the respondent seeks reimbursement of
tuition from the petitioner, asserting that the petitioner did not establish that E.B. and Z.B.
were domiciled within the school district from December 1, 2023 to the end of the 2023–

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 07408-24
2
2024 school year. In a residency appeal, under N.J.S.A. 18A:38-1(b)(2), the parent has
the burden of proof to show by a preponderance of the evidence that the parent’s minor
child or minor children were domiciled in the school district. Has the petitioner shown by
a preponderance of the evidence that E.B. and Z.B. were domiciled in the school district
from December 1, 2023, to the end of the 2023 – 2024 school year? No. The petitioner
has provided no testimony or documentary evidence to show that E.B. and Z.B. were
domiciled in the school district during that time.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
In the 2023 – 2024 school year, E.B. was a first-grade student at Chester M.
Stephens elementary school (CMS). Z.B. was enrolled in the afternoon pre-kindergarten
program as a classified student at Mountain View elementary school. In early February
2024, the respondent sent the petitioner a letter to the address provided by the petitioner,
57 Village Green, Apartment, Unit G, Budd Lake, N.J. 07828. The letter was returned to
the respondent with no forwarding information. As a result, the respondent commenced
a residency investigation concerning E.B. and Z.B. The investigation determined that
E.B. and Z.B. were moved out of the school district by the petitioner on December 1,
2023, and resided at 106 Main Street, Succasunna, New Jersey 07876. On March 28,
2024, the respondent notified the petitioner of the results of the investigation and of a
board hearing regarding the residency of E.B. and Z.B. to be held on April 10, 2024. On
April 8, 2024, the petitioner submitted a form to the respondent indicating that she and
her children faced unexpected homelessness due to a rent increase during the renewal
of the petitioner’s lease. On the form, the petitioner indicated she was staying with her
children in a home or apartment doubling up with family, friends or other relatives due to
hardship or similar reasons. On April 10, 2024, the respondent held a hearing that was
participated in by the petitioner. Following the hearing, the respondent concluded that
E.B. and Z.B. were not domiciled in the school district as of December 1, 2023, and that
the children were disenrolled from the district.
On April 18, 2024, the respondent sent correspondence to the Morris County
Executive Superintendent of Schools (Executive Superintendent) regarding whether E.B.
and Z.B. were homeless and should therefore attend Roxbury Township schools. On

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 07408-24
3
April 26, 2024, the Executive Superintendent sent a letter to the respondent’s
superintendent of schools that concluded that E.B. and Z.B. were not homeless.
On May 6, 2024, the petitioner filed a residency appeal on behalf of her children,
and, on May 23, 2024, respondent filed an answer and counter claim for tuition. The
tuition that the respondent sought for E.B. was $13,666.95 for 121 days. The tuition that
the respondent sought for Z.B. was $2,100 for 7 months. On May 24, 2024, the New
Jersey State Department of Education transmitted the case to the Office of Administrative
Law (OAL) 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 -23, for a hearing under the Uniform
Administrative Procedure Rules, N.J.A.C. 1:1-1.1 to -21.6. The OAL received the case
on the same day. The case was assigned to me on June 5, 2024.
On June 19, 2024, July 25, 2024, October 22, 2024, and October 30, 2024, I held
prehearing conferences under N.J.A.C. 1:1-13.1 to discuss hearing availability dates, the
nature of the proceeding, the issues to be resolved, and any unique evidentiary problems.
I also permitted additional time for discovery. During a telephone conference with the
parties on October 20, 2024, I scheduled the hearing for December 2, 2024, and
December 3, 2024. I also granted the petitioner’s request to appear via zoom for the
hearing, but I required the respondent and the respondent’s witnesses to appear in
person for the hearing. On December 1, 2024, the petitioner sent an email to me
requesting an adjournment of the hearing that was scheduled to begin the next day
because she was scheduled to start a new job. I denied the adjournment request.
I conducted the hearing on December 2, 2024. The petitioner did not appear and
did not contact me to explain her failure to appear. As the petitioner did not appear for
the hearing, an ex parte hearing took place at the OAL in Newark, New Jersey on that
date. At the hearing, the respondent presented testimony and exhibits. The respondent
requested the opportunity to file a written summation, and I approved that request. I gave
the parties until February 3 to file written summations. On February 3, 2025, I received
the respondent’s written summation. The petitioner failed to submit a written summation
and failed to file an extension of time to do so. I kept the record open until February 5 to
give the petitioner additional time to file a written summation or request additional time to

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 07408-24
4
do so. After receiving no communication from the petitioner, I closed the record on
February 5, 2025. On March 24, 2025, I requested an extension of time to file an initial
decision, which was approved.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Having reviewed and considered the testimony and the documentary evidence
presented at the hearing, I FIND the following FACTS in this matter:
Abandonment
The petitioner requested to appear for the hearing via zoom and that request was
approved. Despite this, the petitioner did not appear for the hearing. The petitioner was
afforded proper notice of the hearing date by email and regular mail. The petitioner
requested an adjournment of the hearing on the night before the hearing via email
because she was scheduled to start a new job. The adjournment request was denied,
and the petitioner was notified of the denial of the adjournment request via email. There
is no indication that the petitioner did not receive notice of the denial of the adjournment
request. The petitioner failed to submit a written summation by the due date or to request
an extension of time to do so. In fact, the petitioner has failed to contact the OAL since
her adjournment request was denied on December 1, 2024, the day before the hearing.
I therefore FIND that the petitioner has abandoned her appeal.
The Residency Investigation
The respondent commenced a residency investigation regarding E.B. and Z.B.
after a letter sent to the petitioner by the respondent at the in-district address the petitioner
provided to the respondent was returned without forwarding information. The investigator
started his investigation on February 6, 2024, and concluded it on March 10, 2024. The
investigator discovered that E.B. was always dropped off and picked up at school by his
mother or his aunt, even though he had an assigned school bus. Additionally, the property
manager for the Village Green Apartments informed the investigator that the petitioner
and her children had moved from the Apartment Complex on December 1, 2023. The

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 07408-24
5
investigator learned that the petitioner informed the United States Post Office (USPS) that
her new address was 106 Main Street, Succasunna, N.J. 07876. Additionally, the
investigator learned from a social media post published by the petitioner that the petitioner
changed her driver’s license to reflect her new address. From the same post, the
investigator learned from that the petitioner moved in with her sister and brother-in-law at
106 Main Street, Succasunna to help care for her brother-in-law who had suffered a
stroke. The investigator observed that this residence had two doors that were used to
enter or exit the residence. The investigator observed that the petitioner and her children
always entered or exited through one door while the petitioner’s sister and brother-in-law
always used the other door.
On the afternoon of February 6, 2024, the investigator observed thar E.B. was
picked up from CMS school by a white Toyota Rav-4. The investigator followed the
vehicle and observed it pulling into a driveway at 106 Main Street in Succasunna. Once
the Toyota Rav-4 was parked, the investigator observed the petitioner, E.B. and Z.B. exit
the vehicle and enter the residence. On the mornings of February 7, 2024, February 8,
2024, and March 1, 2024, the investigator observed the petitioner, Z.B., and E.B. exit the
residence at 106 Main Street and enter the Rav-4. On each day, the investigator followed
the Rav-4 as it drove to the Goddard School in Flanders, New Jersey and dropped off Z.B
at the school. The Rav-4 then proceeded to CMS school and dropped E.B. off at that
school.
On the mornings of February 9, 2024, February 15, 2024, February 21, 2024,
February 22, 2024, March 4, 2024, March ,7, 2024, and March 8, 2024, the investigator
observed the petitioner, Z.B., and E.B. exit the residence at 106 Main Street in
Succasunna and enter the Rav-4. On each day, the investigator followed the Rav-4 as it
drove to CMS school and dropped E.B. off at that school. On the mornings of February
12, 2024, and March 5, 2024, the investigator observed the petitioner driving the white
Rav-4 arrive at CMS school and drop E.B. off at that school. On the late evenings of
February 13, 2024, February 19, 2024, February 25, 2024, February 29, 2024, March 3,
2024, March 9, 2024, and March 10, 2024, the investigator observed the white Rav-4
parked in the driveway of the residence or on the street near the residence at 106 Main
Street in Succasunna. On the morning of February 14, 2024, the investigator observed

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 07408-24
6
the petitioner exit the residence at 106 Main Street in Succasunna on three occasions
and go to the white Rav-4 parked in the driveway to get something from the vehicle or put
something in the vehicle. The petitioner then drove Z.B. to the Goddard school in
Flanders and dropped Z.B. off at that school. On the afternoon of February 18, 2024, the
investigator observed the petitioner exit the residence at 106 Main Street in Succasunna,
enter the white Rav-4 parked in the driveway and drive away.
On the morning of February 26, 2024, the investigator observed the petitioner, and
another female exited the residence located at 106 Main Street in Succasunna. The other
female entered a white Honda Civic that was parked in the driveway and drove away.
The petitioner entered the white Rav-4 parked in the driveway and drove away. On the
mornings of February 27, 2024, and February 28, 2024, the investigator observed the
petitioner, Z.B., and E.B. exit the residence at 106 Main Street in Succasunna, enter the
Rav-4, and drive away. On each day, the investigator followed the Rav-4 as it drove to
the Goddard School in Flanders, New Jersey and dropped off Z.B at the school.
Based on his investigation, the investigator concluded that the petitioner was living
in Roxbury with a fixed, regular and adequate residence. I agree.
Tuition
The Petitioner filed the instant appeal challenging the respondent’s decision that
her children were not domiciled in the district from December 1, 2023, to the end of the
2023- 2024 school year. The petitioner’s children, E.B. and Z.B. continued to attend
schools in the respondent’s district from December 1, 2023, to the end of the 2023- 2024
school year despite being moved out of district as of December 1, 2023. The Petitioner
has failed to present any evidence that her children were domiciled in any of the towns
within the Mt. Olive school district despite being given notice and an opportunity to do so.
As no evidence has been presented that E.B. and Z.B. were domiciled in the school
district from December 1, 2023, to the end of the 2023-2024 school year, the Respondent
seeks tuition reimbursement for both children. The respondent submits that total tuition
for E.B., calculated at a per diem rate of $112.95 per day for 121 days amounts to

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 07408-24
7
$13,666.95. I agree. The respondent submits that the total tuition for Z.B. calculated at
a monthly rate of $300 per month for 7 months is $2,100. I agree.
LEGAL ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS
Any child between the ages of five and twenty years old is entitled to a free public
education in the district in which he is a resident. N.J.S.A. 18A:38-1(a); N.J.A.C. 6A:22-
3.1(a). A student is a resident of a school district if his parent or guardian has a permanent
home in the district such that “the parent or guardian intends to return to it when absent
and has no present intent of moving from it, notwithstanding the existence of homes or
residences elsewhere.” N.J.A.C. 6A:22-3.1(a)(1).
Domicile has been defined as the place where a person has his true, fixed,
permanent home and principal establishment, and to which whenever he is absent, he
has the intention of returning. State v. Benny, 20 N.J. 238, 250 (1955). The domicile of
an unemancipated child is that of his or her parent, custodian or guardian. P.B.K. o/b/o
minor child E.Y. v. Board of Ed. of Tenafly, 343 N.J. Super 419, 427 (App. Div. 2001).
Where the local board determines that a child is not properly domiciled in its district,
N.J.S.A. 18A:38-1(b)(2) provides a right of appeal to the parents.
N.J.A.C. 6A:22-6.2(a) authorizes the Commissioner of Education to assess tuition
for non-resident students. It states:
If in the judgement of the Commissioner the evidence does
not support the claim of the resident, he shall assess the
resident tuition for the student prorated to the time of the
student’s ineligible attendance in the school district. Tuition
shall be computed on the basis of 1/180 of the total annual
per pupil cost to the local district multiplied by the number of
days of ineligible attendance and shall be collected in the
manner in which orders of the Commissioner are enforced.
On appeal, the petitioner has the burden of proof to show by a preponderance of
the evidence that their minor child was domiciled in the school district. N.J.S.A. 18A:38-
1(b)(2). Here, the petitioner has failed to appear for the scheduled hearing after being

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 07408-24
8
permitted to appear remotely via zoom. As a result, I CONCLUDE that the petitioner has
abandoned her appeal, and the petition should be dismissed.
Based upon the facts adduced at the hearing and the exhibits introduced by the
respondent, I CONCLUDE that the petitioner has not demonstrated that E.B. and Z.B.
were domiciled in the school district from December 1, 2023, to the end of the 2023-2024
school year. I also CONCLUDE that the respondent is entitled to tuition reimbursement
in the amount of $13,666.95 for E.B. and $2,100 for Z.B. for total tuition reimbursement
of $15,766.95
ORDER
I ORDER that the petitioner’s residency appeal is DISMISSED with prejudice. I
further ORDER that respondent’s counterclaim seeking tuition reimbursement in the
amount of $15,766.95 is GRANTED.
I hereby FILE this initial decision with the ACTING COMMISSIONER OF THE
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION for consideration.
This recommended decision may be adopted, modified, or rejected by the ACTING
COMMISSIONER OF THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, who by law is authorized
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 ACTING
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,

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 07408-24
9
New Jersey 08625-0500. A copy of any exceptions must be sent to the judge and to the
other parties.
April 29, 2025
DATE DANIEL J. BROWN, ALJ
Date Received at Agency: April 29, 2025
Date Mailed to Parties: April 29, 2025
dr

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 07408-24
10
APPENDIX
Witnesses
For Petitioner:
None
For Respondent:
James Carifi
Sumit Bangia
Exhibits
For Petitioner:
None
For Respondent:
R-1 Board Policy No. 5111- Eligibility of Resident/ Nonresident students
R-2 Residency investigation report dated March 11, 2024
R-3 Notice of residency hearing
R-4 McKinney Vento Act forms
R-5 Board Residency Hearing Resolution
R-6 Supplemental residency investigation report dated May 13, 2024
R-7 Board Policy No. 5116- Education of Homeless children and youths
R-8 Notice of Initial Determination of Ineligibility, dated April 16, 2024
R-9 Request for Homeless pupil determination dated April 18, 2024
R-10 Homeless pupil determination dated April 26, 2024