BHUSD Prevails Over Lifschitz in Court as Judge Denies TRO Request

The motion was brought by attorney and parent Daniel Lifschitz of Gipson Hoffman & Pancione, APC, and sought to prevent the board from proceeding with votes related to its internal leadership structure. The court rejected the request during a hearing held earlier today.

In denying the motion, Judge Chalfant made clear that the legal standard for emergency relief had not been met. Addressing the issue directly from the bench, the judge emphasized the absence of both urgency and demonstrated harm.

Judge Chalfant said from the bench, “Not only is there no emergency, no irreparable harm, it’s hard to see how the failure to elect a vice president of a board, I don’t even know what the vice president does, but it’s hard to see that the board’s failure to elect Miss Stern as vice president creates an irreparable harm for anybody.”

Following the ruling, the district released a statement reaffirming that the Board of Education conducts its business lawfully, transparently, and in compliance with applicable law. District officials characterized the lawsuit as an unsuccessful attempt to interfere with the board’s ability to carry out its duties.

The district also stated that the legal challenge diverted attention and resources away from student-focused priorities, noting that taxpayer funds were unnecessarily spent on litigation rather than educational programs.

With the court denying the request for emergency relief, the Board of Education remains free to proceed with its scheduled business without court-imposed restrictions.