Wrightslaw l No Child Left Behind l IDEA 2004 l Fetaweb l Yellow Pages for Kids l Harbor House Law Press
 Home > Articles > Witte v. Clark County Sch. District: Key Points by Pete Wright


The Special Ed Advocate
It's Unique ... and Free!

Enter your email address below:

 

2014 - 2015 Training Programs

Dec 4 - OKC, OK

Jan 16 - Shreveport, LA

Jan 24 - Corpus Christi, TX

Jan 24 - Pensacola, FL

Jan 31 - Champaign, IL

Feb 19 - Lincroft, NJ

Feb 24 - Knoxville, TN

Full Schedule

Be a Hero ...

 Jason at Ft. Benning
... to a Hero
Learn more

Wrightslaw

Home
Topics from A-Z
Free Newsletter
Seminars & Training
Consultations
Yellow Pages for Kids
Press Room
FAQs
Sitemap

Books & Training

Wrightslaw Books & DVDs
Wrightslaw Storesecure store lock
  Advocate's Store
  Student Bookstore
  Exam Copies
Training Center
Bulk Discounts
New! Military Discounts
Mail & Fax Orders

Advocacy Library

Articles
Doing Your Homework
Ask the Advocate
FAQs
Newsletter Archives
Summer School Series
Success Stories
Tips

Law Library

Articles
Caselaw
IDEA 2004
No Child Left Behind
McKinney-Vento Homeless
FERPA
Section 504
Fed Court Complaints

Topics

Advocacy
ADD/ADHD
Allergy/Anaphylaxis
Assistive Technology
Autism Spectrum
Behavior & Discipline
Bullying
College/Continuing Ed
Damages
Discrimination
Due Process
Early Intervention (Part C)
Eligibility
ESY
Evaluations
FAPE
Flyers
Future Planning
Harassment
High-Stakes Tests
Homeless Children
IDEA 2004
Identification & Child Find
IEPs
ISEA
Juvenile Justice
Law School & Clinics
Letters & Paper Trails
LRE/Inclusion
Mediation
Military / DOD
No Child Left Behind
NCLB Directories
NCLB Law & Regs
Parental Protections
PE and Adapted PE
Privacy & Records
Procedural Safeguards
Progress Monitoring
Reading
Related Services
Research Based Instruction
Response to Intervention (RTI)
Restraints/Abuse
Retention
Retaliation
School Report Cards
Section 504
Self-Advocacy
Teachers & Principals
Transition
Twice Exceptional (2e)
VA Special Education

Resources & Directories

Advocate's Bookstore
Advocacy Resources
Directories
  Disability Groups
  International
  State DOEs
  State PTIs
Free Flyers
Free Pubs
Free Newsletters
Legal & Advocacy
Glossaries
   Legal Terms
   Assessment Terms
Best School Websites

 

Witte v. Clark County School District: Key Points
by Pete Wright

The decision in Witte v. Clark County is important for several reasons.

1. "In 1998, without exhausting administrative procedures and requesting a special education due process hearing, Shawn and his mother filed suit in Federal Court."

Key Point:
This sentence tells you that although special ed procedures were not followed, the parent was not required to "exhaust administrative remedies." In most jurisdictions, the failure to exhaust would cause the case to be thrown out of court. In one sense, the Ninth Circuit reversed themselves because of their "Charlie F" ruling which they discuss in Witte.

2. The child and parent brought an action for compensatory and punitive monetary damages against the school district and three individuals, Robert Henry (program director), Beverly Minnear (principal of Variety School) and Woodard Macke (teacher) for violations of the Rehabilitation Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and tort claims under state law.

Key Point:
Despite the fact that the child has a disability and was enrolled in a special education program, the decision does not mention the IDEA.

3. The District Court dismissed their action because they failed to exhaust administrative remedies under IDEA. The Ninth Circuit reversed.

Key Point
: The Ninth Circuit reversed the District Court's decison, finding that parents are not necessarily required to go through a due process hearing before bringing the school district into court for punitive damages. When you read the Court's logic and reasoning, and how they sidestepped their earlier decision, you see that law and facts do not control outcome. This case demonstrates the importance of drafting the pleadings so the judge wants to rule in your favor.


When I talked with Sara Winter, attorney in Witte, she advised that:

  • Eleven of school personnel were out of the school but not fired;
  • The Nevada legislature passed anti-aversive legislation;
  • It appears the school district knew about the abuse and condoned it.

    Issues about intimidation and retaliation are ongoing.


Note from Wrightslaw

Several files about this case are available on the Wrightslaw site:

Complaint in Witte v. Clark County Sch. (Mar 2, 1998)

Decision by the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
(Dec 2, 1999)

Analysis of the Witte Case by Pete Wright (Dec. 16, 1999)

Original Wrightslaw Alert on Shawn Witte's case (Dec 3, 1999)

Update on Witte case (Dec 7, 1999)

Update #2 on Witte case (Dec 17, 1999)

2002 Decision by U. S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (Sep 10, 2002)


Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon The Special Ed Advocate: It's Free!

 

Wrightslaw: Special Education Law, 2nd Edition, by Pam and Pete Wright
About the Book

Wrightslaw: All About IEPs
About the Book

Wrightslaw: All About Tests and Assessments
About the Book

Surviving Due Process: Stephen Jeffers v. School Board
About the DVD Video

 

Copyright 1998-2014, Peter W. D. Wright and Pamela Darr Wright. All rights reserved.

Contact Us | Press Mission l Our Awards l Privacy Policy l Disclaimer l Site Map