Michelle Evaul, on behalf of Stuart Country Day School of the Sacred Heart, Mercer County v. New Jersey Department of Education, Office of Interdistrict Choice and Nonpublic Schools, 9/16/26 (#371-26E)

371-26E
OAL Dkt. No. EDU 12325-26
Agency Dkt. No. 317-07-26
New Jersey Commissioner of Education
Order on Emergent Relief
Michelle Evaul, on behalf of Stuart Country Day
School of the Sacred Heart, Mercer County,
Petitioner,
v.
New Jersey Department of Education, Office of
Interdistrict Choice and Nonpublic Schools,
Respondents.
The record of this emergent matter, the sound recording of the hearing held at the Office of
Administrative Law (OAL), and the recommended Order 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 recommended Order denying petitioner’s application for emergent relief is
adopted. This matter shall continue at the OAL with such proceedings as the parties and the ALJ deem
necessary to bring it to closure.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION
Date of Decision: 	September 16, 2026
Date of Mailing: 	September 17, 2026

New Jersey is an Equal Opportunity Employer
ORDER DENYING
EMERGENT RELIEF
OAL DKT. NO. EDU 12325-26
AGENCY DKT. NO. 317-07-26
MICHELELLE EVAUL, ON BEHALF OF STUART
COUNTRY DAY SCHOOL OF THE SACRED HEART,
Petitioner,
v.
NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION,
OFFICE OF INTERDISTRICT CHOICE AND NONPUBLIC SCHOOLS,
Respondent.
__________________________
Sandy Schlesinger, Esq., for petitioner (Venable LLP, attorneys)
David L. Kalisky, Deputy Attorney General, for respondent (Jennifer Davenport,
Attorney General of New Jersey, attorney)
BEFORE DIANE HOAGLAND, ALJ:
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
On July 23, 2026, petitioner, Michael Evaul, on behalf of Stuart Country Day School
of the Sacred Heart (Stuart), filed a motion with respondent, New Jersey Department of

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 12325-26
2
Education, Office of Interdistrict Choice and Nonpublic Schools, for emergent relief
seeking monetary damages for nonpublic school funding. Can petitioner prevail? No. To
prevail on a motion for emergent relief, a petitioner must demonstrate, among other
things, that the remedy cannot be redressed adequately by monetary damages. Crowe
v. DeGioia, 90 N.J. 126, 132-33 (1982).
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On July 23, 2026, petitioner filed a petition of appeal, together with a motion for
emergent relief, with respondent seeking an order directing respondent to accept the late
submission of petitioner’s enrollment report for the 2025-2026 school year and allocate
funds for the 2026-2027 school year.
On July 28, 2026, respondent transmitted the case to the Office of Administrative
Law as a contested case under N.J.S.A. 52:14B-1 to -15 and N.J.S.A. 52:14F-1 to -13.
On August 10, 2026, petitioner filed an amended petition of appeal.
On August 12, 2026, respondent filed its opposition to the motion, together with a
cross motion to dismiss the petition of appeal, and on August 15, 2026, petitioner filed a
reply in support of its motion for emergent relief and in opposition to the cross motion to
dismiss the petition of appeal.
On August 17, 2026, I held the oral argument for the motion for emergent relief.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Based on the papers submitted in support of and in opposition to the motion for
emergent relief, I FIND the following as FACT for purposes of this motion only:
Various state statutes require that school districts provide certain goods and
services to eligible students enrolled in nonpublic schools located in the district’s
boundaries, including textbooks, security equipment and services, nursing services, and

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 12325-26
3
technology equipment and services. N.J.S.A 18A:58-37.1 et seq. provides for school
districts to purchase and loan textbooks to students enrolled in nonpublic schools.
N.J.S.A. 18A:58-37.8 et seq. requires school districts to provide security equipment and
services to nonpublic schools. N.J.S.A. 18A:40-23 et seq. requires school districts to
provide nursing services to nonpublic schools. Finally, the annual appropriations act for
the 2026-2027 school year, as well as previous school years, require that school districts
provide technology equipment and services to nonpublic schools. Each of these
programs are intended to be fully funded by State appropriations. The school districts
are not expected to support these programs through their local tax levy or any other
revenue source. To implement these programs, the Office of Interdistrict Choice and
Nonpublic Schools requires nonpublic schools to complete the Nonpublic School
Enrollment Report (Enrollment Report).
In prior academic years, petitioner received funds from the New Jersey State
funded nonpublic school programs to support its security, nursing services, technology,
textbook aid, and learning support services. During the 2025-2026 academic year,
petitioner received $54,120 in security aid; $9,962 in technology aid; $13,961 in textbook
aid; and $38,438 in nursing service aid.
In November 2022, Michelle Evaul began working for Stuart as its chief of staff and
served in that role until June 2024. During that time, Rose Neubert served as its chief
financial and operating officer. Also, during that time, Neubert, together with Julia Wall,
the head of school for Stuart, were designated contacts for respondent. As the chief
financial and operating officer, Neubert was responsible for completing the Nonpublic
School Enrollment Report, and Evaul was responsible for submitting the report to
respondent. When Neubert retired at the end of June 2024, Evaul became the chief
financial and operating officer for Stuart.
On December 3, 2024, respondent notified the nonpublic school administrators
that the enrollment report was open for the 2024-2025 school year.

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 12325-26
4
On January 9, 2025, Evaul emailed respondent to request the login information for
her to complete the enrollment report but did not identify herself as the new chief financial
and operating officer or ask respondent to add her as a designated contact.
On December 1, 2025, respondent notified Neubert and Wall that the enrollment
report was open for the 2025-2026 school year, and that the report was due on January
9, 2026. Respondent also notified them that schools which did not submit their reports
by that date would not be eligible for services for the upcoming school year. Since Evaul
did not receive the notice, petitioner did not submit its enrollment report for the 2025-2026
school year by the January 9, 2026 deadline.
On June 29, 2026, respondent notified Neubert and Wall that petitioner could still
receive state funding if it completed its enrollment report for the 2025-2026 school year
by June 30, 2026. Wall responded to add Evaul as petitioner’s designated contact, and
respondent, in turn, provided Wall and Evaul with petitioner’s login information for the
enrollment report.
On July 2, 2026, Evaul attempted to submit the enrollment report for the 2025-
2026 school year, but the electronic submission system would not accept it because the
system was already keyed for the 2026-2027 school year.
On July 7, 2026, respondent released its notifications for the allocation of funds for
the nonpublic school programs.
On July 15, 2026, Evaul asked respondent about the status of petitioner’s state
funding for the 2026-2027 school year and forwarded petitioner’s New Jersey State
Funded Programs Nonpublic School Affirmation of Consultation Form, which she had
submitted on April 1, 2026 to Princeton Public Schools, and respondent advised Evaul
that the consultation form was not the form required to receive state funding. Petitioner
is located within the boundaries of the Princeton Public Schools district.

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 12325-26
5
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
To prevail on a motion for emergent relief, petitioner must meet the standards in
Crowe v. DeGioia, 90 N.J. 126 (1982), which are codified at N.J.A.C. 6A:3-1.6(b):
1. The petitioner will suffer irreparable harm if the
requested relief is not granted;
2. The legal right underlying petitioner’s claim is settled;
3. The petitioner has a 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.
Irreparable Harm
First, petitioner must demonstrate irreparable harm. Harm is irreparable when no
adequate remedy exists in law or in equity, including when the remedy cannot be
redressed adequately by monetary damages. Crowe, 90 N.J. at 132–33. The petitioner
must demonstrate more than a mere risk of irreparable harm; it must show an immediate
irreparable injury. Continental Group. Inc. v. Amoco Chems. Corp., 614 F.2d 351, 359 (3d
Cir. 1980). Moreover, the petitioner cannot claim "imminent" irreparable injury when the
petitioner’s delay created the emergency. McKenzie v. Corzine, 396 N.J. Super. 405, 414
(App. Div. 2007).
In this case, petitioner argues that it will suffer irreparable harm if respondent does
not provide it with the state nonpublic school funding that it has received for many years
before the 2026-2027 academic year. Petitioner, however, is seeking monetary damages.
In addition, petitioner caused its emergency. Therefore, I CONCLUDE that petitioner has
not demonstrated that it will suffer irreparable harm if respondent does not accept its
enrollment report for the 2025-2026 school year and allocate its nonpublic school funding
for the 2026-2027 school year.

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 12325-26
6
Legal Right is Settled
Second, petitioner must demonstrate that the legal right underlying its claim is
settled. Crowe, 90 N.J. at 133. Petitioner, however, makes no legal argument that it is.
Therefore, I CONCLUDE that petitioner has not demonstrated that respondent must
accept its enrollment report for the 20205-26 school year and allocate its nonpublic school
funding for the 2026-2027 school year.
Likelihood of Success on the Merits
Third, petitioner must demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits. Crowe,
90 N.J. at 133. Since petitioner cannot demonstrate that it even has a legal right to the
relief it seeks, petitioner does not have a likelihood of success on the merits. Therefore,
I CONCLUDE that petitioner has not demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits.
Equities and Interests of the Parties
Finally, petitioner must demonstrate that it will suffer greater hardship than
petitioner if the relief is not granted. Crowe, 90 N.J. at 134. Petitioner argues that it needs
the funding to function, but respondent argues that its interest in enforcing deadlines is
more significant. In addition, respondent argues that it cannot make additional allocations
once the deadline has passed unless the Legislature appropriates additional funds for
this purpose or the Department of Education recalculates the statewide allocations and
reduces all other allocations to accommodate this one. Given this balancing of the
hardships, I CONCLUDE that respondent will suffer greater harm than petitioner if the
relief is granted.
ORDER
Given my findings of fact and conclusions of law, I ORDER that petitioner’s motion
for emergent relief is DENIED.

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 12325-26
7
This order on application for emergent 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 case. The final decision must be issued without
undue delay, but no later than forty-five days after 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 becomes a final decision on the issue of
emergent relief in accordance with N.J.S.A. 52:14B-10.
August 18, 2026
DATE DIANE HOAGLAND, ALJ
Date Received at Agency:
Date Mailed to Parties:
DH/am