Thursday, August 1, 2013
Wrightslaw is live blogging from the Institute of Special Education Advocacy (ISEA) all week. We hope you will join us!
Today’s topics include:
- Attorney’s Evidence Strategies Panel
- Preparing a Case for Trial/Due Process
- Drafting Due Process Claims/State Complaints
- Dispute Resolution and Settlements
- Case Law Review by Circuit
********************************************
3:28 pm Wrightslaw
Current Case Law Review by Circuit
Sonja Kerr, Senior Attorney the Public Interest Law Center of Philadelphia and the Law Center’s Director of Disabilities Rights.
Parent Participation
Anchorage Sch. Dist. v. M.P., 689 F. 3d 1047 (9th Cir. 2012)
D.B. v Gloucester Township (3d Cir. July 2012)
Doug C. v. Hawaii Dep’t. of Education, 2013 App. LEXIS 11904 (9th Cir. 2013)
Procedural Cases
R.E. v. New York City Department of Education, 694 F.3d 167 (2d Cir. 2012)
M.H. v. New York City Dep’t. of Education, 685 F.3d 217 (2nd Cir. 2012)
L.G. v. Fair Lawn Board of Education (3d Cir. 2012)
H.C. v. Katonah-Lewisboro Union Free School District, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 13099 (2d Cir. 2013)
Brooks v. D.C., 841 F. Supp. 2d 253 (DC 2012)
D.F. v. Collingswood Borough, 694 F.3d 488 (3d Cir. 2012)
Class Actions
Jamie S. v. Milwaukee, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 117672 (7th Cir. 2012)
D.L. v. District of Columbia, 713 F.3d 120 (D.C. Cir. 2013)
J.T. v. Dumont Pub. Schs., 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 8504 (3d Cir. Apr. 26, 2013)
Chester Upland Sch. Dist. v. Commonwealth, 284 F.R.D. 305 (E.D. Pa. 2012)
P.V. v. School District of Philadelphia (E.D. Pa, Feb. 2013)
Corey H. v. Board of Education (N.D. Ill, July 2012)
Inclusion
JT v. Dumont Public Schools (3d Cir. 2013)
L.G. v. Fair Lawn Board of Education (3d Cir. 2012)
Woods v. Northport Public School (6th Cir. 2012)
D.W. v. Milwaukee Public Schools (7th Cir. 2013)
G.B. v. Tuxedo Union Free School District (2nd Cir. 2012)
M.M. v. Lancaster County School (8th Cir. 2012)
Transition Services
Sebastian M. v. King Philip Regional School District (1st Cir. 2012)
Klein Independent School District v. Hovem (5th Circuit, 2012)
Tuition Reimbursement
Sebastian M. v. King Philip Regional School District (1st Cir. 2012)
G.B. v. Tuxedo Union Free School District (2d Cir. 2012)
M.H. v. New York City Dep’t of Educ (2d Cir. 2012) (cf R.E. v. NYC Dep’t of Educ (2d Cir. 2012)
M.B. v. Minisink Valley Central School District (2d 2013)
P.K. v. New York City Department of Education (2d 2013)
L.G. v. Fair Lawn Board of Education (3d Cir. 2012)
Upper Freehold Regional Board of Education v. T.W. (3d Cir. 2012)
R.G. v. Downingtown Area School District (3d Cir. 2013)
Jefferson County School v. Elizabeth E. (10th Cir. 2012)
Bullying, Discipline, and Related Claims
Morrow v. Balaski (3d Cir. 2013)
Stewart v. Waco ISD, (5th Cir. 2013)
Chigano v. City of Knoxville, (6th Cir. 2013)
Long v. Murray County, (11th Cir. 2013)
Argenyi v. Creighton (8th Cir. 2013)
1:49 pm Wrightslaw
Alternative Dispute Resolution Under IDEA 2004
Jim Comstock-Galagan, Executive Director of the Southern Disability Law Center (SDLC)
OSEP Letter Dispute Resolution
http://www2.ed.gov/policy/speced/guid/idea/memosdcltrs/index.html
OSEP Memo and Q & A on Dispute Resolution, July 23, 2013
MS Word (411KB) | PDF (436KB)
Wrightslaw has broken the OSEP memo down into the specific components as smaller files.
Mediation
- Mediation Requirements
- Confidentiality and costs
- Timelines
- When parties reach an agreement
- When parties choose not to use mediation
To enforce mediation agreement you cannot go to due process, but can file a state complaint.
Due Process Complaints
20 U.S.C. 1415(b)(7)
- What must be included
- Proposed resolution of problem
- Timelines
Resolution Sessions
- Timelines
- Review period
- Enforceable agreements
12:14 pm Wrightslaw
Drafting Due Process Claims / State Complaints
Pete Wright
Due process request letter – first step.
What controls the outcome of a complaint? Facts or law?
Neither. Pete explains what does.
Only one thing controls outcome – whether the HO/ALJ wants to rule in your favor.
Prepare for the ultimate event, a due process hearing – a battle of expert witnesses. Assume you will lose and your case will go up on appeal to federal court. Prepare parents for slow process without a quick fix.
Persuasion – your focus, your theme, simple and easy to understand.
First step for parents – organizing the file. Check the Wrightslaw you tube channel.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Spjccoj4Ow0
Have parents organize the file, write letters, keep a paper trail. Empower parents rather than do for them.
- “The paternalist attitude of professionals is what holds parents back.”
- “The biggest handicap of persons with disabilities are the expectations of others.”
Source: Harry Gewanter, MD 7/31/2013
Perceptions and first impressions are critical. Attempt to be proactive rather than be on the defense.
Your real goal is to avoid due process. You do this by “preparing for due process.”
Start by creating a paper trail of documentation of everything. Your letters will tell a story and create visual imagery. Use the Letter to the Stranger format.
Be persuasive not blaming.
11:00 am Wrightslaw
Preparing for Hearings and Trials
Sonja Kerr, Senior Attorney the Public Interest Law Center of Philadelphia and the Law Center’s Director of Disabilities Rights.
Pat Howey, Indiana Advocate at Special Education Consulting
This training is about the important part advocates play in due process.
- Attending with parents who are going pro se
- Assisting attorneys
- Helping parents plan and prepare
Prepare. Plan on going to due process. Develop your strategy.
Assume every case will go to hearing.
Assume every case will be appealed.
Assume every case will end up at the US Supreme Court.
Know the Rules of Adverse Assumptions
Read and re-read
- the law
- case law
- law review articles
- the case facts
- the entire child’s file
Discussion of inter-relationship between special education, juvenile justice system, behavior, self-medication (substance abuse).
Tips for advocates: initial consultations, what to tell parents, using legal element charts, informing parents of pitfalls.
Advocate responsibilities at the pre-attorney stage… and the attorney stage.
Post-Winkelman: the good, the bad, the ugly.
Tags: ISEA · W&M Institute of Special Education AdvocacyNo Comments

Attorneys Evidence Strategies Panel 






0 responses so far ↓
There are no comments yet...kick things off by filling out the form.