XXX Title here
by Pete & Pam Wright
Wrightslaw.com
Print this page
Wrightslaw: Special Education Legal Developments and Cases 2019
We are on the verge of releasing our fifth "Year in Review" special education case law book. In 2015 we published our first such book, titled Wrightslaw: Special Education Legal Developments and Cases 2015. We have issued it each successive year. The books contain all of the U.S. Courts of Appeal decisions issued each year. They are available from Wrightslaw as a searchable e-book (PDF) either as an immediate download for a specific year or all four are available as a single purchase. The print version of the books are available on Amazon.
The newest book, 2019 edition, includes all IDEA and Section 504/ADA special education cases issued by the U.S. Courts of Appeal.
In our 2015 book there were two cases, Fry and Endrew F. that were issued by the Sixth and Tenth Circuit Courts of Appeal, respectively. Each was appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which reversed and unanimously ruled in favor of the parents! Those two decisions issued by SCOTUS, on February 22 and March 22, 2017, respectively, and the transcripts of Justice Kagan and Chief Justice Roberts, are included in Wrightslaw: Special Education Legal Developments and Cases 2017.
After those dates, many Courts of Appeal decisions were impacted by Fry and Endrew F. as reflected in Wrightslaw: Special Education Legal Developments and Cases 2018.
In our current 2019 book to be published and available in a few days, the Courts of Appeal decisions fine-tuned the impact of each case in their respective Circuit.
Some sample cases
In the 2019 edition you will learn what happened to the third year medical student who received accommodations for her dyslexia while in college and medical school. In her final year while seeking her medical residency, the National Board of Medical Examiners denied her those accommodations for the U.S. Medical Licensing Examination.
We also have the case of the private day care center and a child with Down syndrome. After being in the program for three years, the child was not toilet trained and was subsequently expelled for that reason.
We also have several private school tuition reimbursement cases. In one, the parents prevailed before the U.S. District Court, were seeking attorney's fees, and the school district appealed to the Court of Appeals, which denied the recovery of attorney's fees because the case was deemed to be moot. In another, the Court refused to hear the appeal, vacated the lower court decision because the case was also moot. In a third case, all tribunals agreed that the public school did not provide FAPE, but the parents failed to prove that the private school was appropriate, thus tuition was denied.
In another case, the Court noted "that after initially finding the child eligible for an IEP," "outside counsel" and central office personnel, in a private meeting not including the parents, "intervened" with the child's teachers and directed them to make a finding of "no eligibility," which they did.
In a 504/ADA case, prior to the child participating on a school field trip and eating at a restaurant, the school was aware that the child, being "allergic to gluten" "would not eat restaurant 'gluten free' prepared food and instead would bring his own homemade food." During the trip, the restaurant would not permit the child to eat the homemade food in the restaurant. He had "to eat his homemade meal outside and apart from the rest of his classmates."
Background
This case is about S.L., . . .
xxx
xxx
xxx
END xxx here
Created: 7/1/2020
Revised:
ZZZ
