CB Ex Rel. BB v. SPECIAL SCHOOL DIST. NO. 1, MINNEAPOLIS
636 F.3d 981
8th Cir.2011Background
- C.B. is a Minnesota child with a learning disability challenging the School District No. 1 under IDEA seeking private-school tuition reimbursement.
- The District conducted multiple IEPs from 2004–2005 through 2007–2008 but progress in reading remained well below grade expectations.
- After unsuccessful attempts to obtain adequate progress in public school, parents enrolled C.B. at Groves Academy in 2008.
- And the District declined to reimburse the Groves tuition for 2008–2009.
- An ALJ awarded reimbursement; the district court reversed, finding Groves not an appropriate placement and that FAPE was not provided.
- The Eighth Circuit reversed and remanded, holding that Groves could be reimbursable where a proper FAPE was not offered.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the District provided a FAPE for C.B. in 4th–5th grade. | CB’s parents rely on subpar progress and failed IEPs indicating no educational benefit. | District argues there was some educational progress and the IEPs were reasonably calculated to provide benefit. | Yes, the District failed to provide a FAPE. |
| Whether Groves Academy was an appropriate placement under the IDEA for reimbursement. | Groves offered a suitable, appropriate private placement when the public program failed. | Groves was largely a disability-focused environment and not the least restrictive environment; the district favored CLASS as less restrictive. | Groves was an appropriate placement; reimbursement permitted. |
Key Cases Cited
- Board of Education v. Rowley, 458 U.S. 176 (1982) (FAPE standard; educational benefits must be reasonably calculated to provide progress)
- Burlington School Committee v. Department of Education, 471 U.S. 359 (1985) (reimbursement may be ordered where a public program fails to provide FAPE and private placement is proper)
- Florence County Sch. Dist. Four v. Carter, 510 U.S. 7 (1993) (private placement reimbursement when FAPE not timely available)
- Forest Grove Sch. Dist. v. TA, 129 S. Ct. 2484 (2009) (hearing officers may order reimbursement; private placement need not be previously provided by public school)
- CJN v. Minneapolis Pub. Sch., 323 F.3d 630 (8th Cir. 2003) (importance of educational benefit as a factor in adequacy of IEPs)
- Fort Zumwalt School Dist. v. Clynes, 119 F.3d 607 (8th Cir. 1997) (review of whether IDEA provides ‘some educational benefit’ is not limited to perfect progress)