BY MICHAEL TARM and BY SOPHIA TAREEN

Associated Press

CHICAGO

--Mayor Rahm Emanuel's appeal to the courts to end a six-day Chicago teachers strike set off a new round of recriminations Monday but did not appear to be leading to a quick resolution of the walkout that has left parents hunting for options for 350,000 students.

City attorneys asked a Cook County Circuit Court judge Monday morning for an injunction that would force teachers back into the classroom and end an acrimonious standoff with the nation's third-largest school district. The suit claims that the strike violates state law because it threatens the safety of children and is based on issues other than pay and benefits.

But Judge Peter Flynn did not grant the city an immediate hearing, instead scheduling one for Wednesday morning, said Sarah Hamilton, Emanuel's spokeswoman. That would be a day after Chicago Teachers Union delegates are scheduled to vote again on whether to suspend the strike.

Union officials condemned Emanuel's legal move as an act of vindictiveness by a "bullying" mayor. In a statement, the CTU said the filing appeared to be "a vindictive act" given that the union's delegates are scheduled to vote anew on the contract provisions on Tuesday.

"This attempt to thwart our democratic process is consistent with Mayor Emanuel's bullying behavior toward public school educators," the union said.

Legal experts were split on whether Emanuel ultimately would be successful in persuading a judge to intervene. Martin Malin, the director of the Chicago-based Institute for Law and the Workplace at the Kent College of Law, says no judge in Illinois or, as far as he knows, in any other state, has ever granted an injunction during a teachers strike on grounds it threatens public safety.

Such arguments have worked in strikes by garbage or water-treatment workers but not as far as teachers, he said.

"They are in uncharted waters," Malin said. "There's case law out there that the danger has to be clear and present and can't just be speculative. So they have a very heavy burden of proof."