{"id":142,"date":"2009-01-23T09:15:24","date_gmt":"2009-01-23T14:15:24","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.wrightslaw.com\/blog\/?p=142"},"modified":"2009-02-05T10:06:45","modified_gmt":"2009-02-05T15:06:45","slug":"supreme-court-to-hear-new-case-on-old-issue","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.wrightslaw.com\/blog\/supreme-court-to-hear-new-case-on-old-issue\/","title":{"rendered":"Supreme Court to Hear New Case on Old Issue"},"content":{"rendered":"<div style=\"padding-bottom:20px; padding-top:10px;\" class=\"hupso-share-buttons\"><!-- Hupso Share Buttons - https:\/\/www.hupso.com\/share\/ --><a class=\"hupso_pop\" href=\"https:\/\/www.hupso.com\/share\/\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/static.hupso.com\/share\/buttons\/gallery\/share-button-gray.png\" style=\"border:0px\" alt=\"Share\" \/><\/a><script type=\"text\/javascript\">var hupso_services=new Array(\"Twitter\",\"Facebook\",\"Google Plus\",\"Pinterest\",\"Linkedin\",\"StumbleUpon\",\"Digg\",\"Reddit\",\"Bebo\",\"Delicious\");var hupso_icon_type = \"labels\";var hupso_background=\"#FFFFFF\";var hupso_border=\"#FFFFFF\";var hupso_image_folder_url = \"\";var hupso_twitter_via=\"wrightslaw\";var hupso_url=\"\";var hupso_title=\"Supreme%20Court%20to%20Hear%20New%20Case%20on%20Old%20Issue%20\";<\/script><script type=\"text\/javascript\" src=\"https:\/\/static.hupso.com\/share\/js\/share.js\"><\/script><!-- Hupso Share Buttons --><\/div><p><span style=\"color: #000080;\"><strong>Court to Revisit Tuition Reimbursement Issue in <em>Forest Grove School District v. T. A.<\/em> (08-305)<\/strong><br \/>\n<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #000080;\"> <\/span>On January 16, 2009, the Supreme Court added a special education case to their docket for this term. <a href=\"https:\/\/www.wrightslaw.com\/law\/caselaw\/08\/9th.forest.grove.ta.htm\"><span style=\"color: #000080;\"><em>Forest Grove School District v. T. A.<\/em><\/span><\/a> is a special education case about tuition reimbursement for a child who was never found eligible and never received special education services from the school district.<!--more--><\/p>\n<p>The question presented is whether parents who unilaterally enroll their disabled child in a private school are entitled to tuition reimbursement if the child never received special education from the district.<\/p>\n<p>Forest Grove appealed <a href=\"https:\/\/www.wrightslaw.com\/law\/caselaw\/08\/9th.forest.grove.ta.htm\"><span style=\"color: #000080;\">an adverse decision from the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit<\/span><\/a> on behalf of parents who sent their son to a private school for children with behavioral and emotional problems. Two years earlier, the school district determined that although T.A. had ADHD, severe depression, substance abuse problems, and was failing high school classes, he was not eligible for special education services under IDEA nor for protections under Section 504. <span style=\"color: #000080;\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.wrightslaw.com\/law\/caselaw\/08\/9th.forest.grove.ta.htm\"><br \/>\n<\/a><a href=\"https:\/\/www.wrightslaw.com\/law\/caselaw\/08\/9th.forest.grove.ta.htm\"><span style=\"color: #000080;\"> https:\/\/www.wrightslaw.com\/law\/caselaw\/08\/9th.forest.grove.ta.htm<\/span><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n<p>There is a split among circuits on this question: &#8220;whether 20 U.S.C. \u00a7 1412(a)(10)(C) creates a categorical bar to reimbursement of private school tuition for students who have not \u2018previously received special education and related services.&#8217;\u201d<\/p>\n<p>The First Circuit held that the statute imposes a categorical bar (<em>Greenland School District v. Amy N<\/em>., 358 F.3d 150, 159-60 (1st Cir. 2004). The Second and Eleventh Circuits held otherwise. (<em>Frank G. v. Bd. of Educ.<\/em>, 459 F.3d 356, 367-76 (2d Cir. 2006), cert. denied, 128 S. Ct. 436 (2007); <em>M.M. ex rel. C.M. v. Sch. Bd<\/em>., 437 F.3d 1085, 1098-99 (11th Cir. 2006)).<\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #000080;\"><strong>Earlier Cases, No Resolution by Supreme Court<br \/>\n<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\nTwo cases on this issue came before the Supreme Court in 2007. Neither was resolved.<\/p>\n<p>In <a href=\"https:\/\/www.wrightslaw.com\/law\/caselaw\/ussupct.nyc.tomf.pdf\"><span style=\"color: #000080;\"><em><span>Board of Education v. Tom F<\/span>.<\/em><\/span><\/a>, Justice Anthony Kennedy suddenly recused himself after briefs were filed, but before oral arguments. After oral argument, the Court issued a 4-4 ruling. The tie upheld tuition reimbursement in that case, but did not establish a nationwide precedent.<br \/>\n<a href=\"https:\/\/www.wrightslaw.com\/law\/caselaw\/ussupct.nyc.tomf.pdf\"><span style=\"color: #000080;\">https:\/\/www.wrightslaw.com\/law\/caselaw\/ussupct.nyc.tomf.pdf<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<p>A short time later, the high  Court denied review in <em>Frank G. v. Bd Educ Hyde Park Central School District<\/em> after Justice Kennedy recused himself again.<\/p>\n<p>To learn more about the Tom F. case, read <a href=\"https:\/\/www.wrightslaw.com\/blogs\/07\/nyc.tomf.history.htm\"><span style=\"color: #000080;\">A Short History of <em>New York Bd of Ed v. Tom F<\/em>.<\/span><\/a> at <a href=\"https:\/\/www.wrightslaw.com\/blogs\/07\/nyc.tomf.history.htm\"><span style=\"color: #000080;\">https:\/\/www.wrightslaw.com\/blogs\/07\/nyc.tomf.history.htm<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"color: #000080;\"><strong>Documents in Forest Grove Sch. Dist. v. T.A. <\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p>On Petition for a <a href=\"http:\/\/www.harborhouselaw.com\/law\/plead\/08.1203.forest.grove.ta.cert.brief.oppos.pdf\"><span style=\"color: #000080;\">Writ of Certiorari &#8211; Respondent&#8217;s Brief in Opposition<\/span><\/a><br \/>\nURL: <a href=\"http:\/\/www.harborhouselaw.com\/law\/plead\/08.1203.forest.grove.ta.cert.brief.oppos.pdf\"><span style=\"color: #000080;\">http:\/\/<\/span><span style=\"color: #000080;\">www.harborhouselaw.com\/law\/plead\/08.1203.forest.grove.ta.cert.brief.oppos.pdf<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/origin.www.supremecourtus.gov\/docket\/08-305.htm\"><span style=\"color: #000080;\">Supreme Court Docket for 08-305<\/span><\/a><br \/>\nURL: <a href=\"http:\/\/origin.www.supremecourtus.gov\/docket\/08-305.htm\"><span style=\"color: #000080;\">http:\/\/origin.www.supremecourtus.gov\/docket\/08-305.htm<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Court to Revisit Tuition Reimbursement Issue in Forest Grove School District v. T. A. (08-305) On January 16, 2009, the Supreme Court added a special education case to their docket <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"https:\/\/www.wrightslaw.com\/blog\/supreme-court-to-hear-new-case-on-old-issue\/\">Continue Reading \u2192<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"om_disable_all_campaigns":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"_uf_show_specific_survey":0,"_uf_disable_surveys":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[35,6,7,122],"tags":[1301,272,258],"class_list":["post-142","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-eligibility","category-legal-decisions","category-legal-news","category-placement","tag-eligibility","tag-supreme-court","tag-tuition-reimbursement"],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.wrightslaw.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/142","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.wrightslaw.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.wrightslaw.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.wrightslaw.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.wrightslaw.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=142"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.wrightslaw.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/142\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.wrightslaw.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=142"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.wrightslaw.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=142"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.wrightslaw.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=142"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}