178 F. Supp. 3d 443
N.D. Tex.2016Background
- Kelsey, a student with prior IDEA eligibility (specific learning disability; later psychiatric diagnoses), attended the Winston School (a private nonpublic school serving students with disabilities) for 11th–12th grades under an LAUSD IEP/settlement that placed her at a California NPS but in practice substituted Winston.
- Woody (mother) moved to Dallas in August 2013; she notified Dallas ISD (DISD) in September 2013 that Kelsey resided in DISD and provided the LAUSD May 2013 IEP, medical reports, and requested DISD funding/reimbursement comparable to that IEP.
- DISD rejected LAUSD’s May 2013 IEP at a December 17, 2013 transfer meeting, sought to reevaluate Kelsey, and did not offer temporary services or finalize an IEP for the 2013–2014 year.
- DISD completed an FIE in April 2014 that initially found emotional disturbance but concluded Kelsey did not need special education; after a privately funded IEE, DISD’s ARDC determined on May 22, 2014 Kelsey was IDEA-eligible and proposed an IEP for placement at a DISD high school—only days before Kelsey’s May 29, 2014 graduation from Winston.
- Woody sought reimbursement for 2013–2014 Winston tuition and related costs; an administrative hearing officer awarded full tuition and transportation reimbursement. The district court conducted de novo review and affirmed in part, vacated in part, awarding Woody $11,942.50 (half the tuition for 18 weeks).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Woody) | Defendant's Argument (DISD) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether 34 C.F.R. § 300.323(f) (transfer-student rule) required DISD to provide comparable services | Kelsey was effectively a transfer with an existing IEP; DISD should have provided comparable services | DISD: transfer rule applies only if student enrolls in a new public school; Kelsey never enrolled in DISD | Held: Transfer rule did not apply because Kelsey did not enroll in a new school |
| Whether Kelsey was a parentally-placed private-school student (affecting rights and remedies) | Woody: DISD had obligation to provide FAPE; reimbursement appropriate | DISD: if parentally placed, different duties and limits apply; it offered an appropriate IEP | Held: Kelsey was not a parentally-placed student—her placement at Winston resulted from LAUSD agreement, not a unilateral parental private placement |
| Whether DISD violated child-find / evaluation timing obligations after notice of residency and IEP | Woody: DISD had immediate obligations upon notice and delayed unreasonably | DISD: it requested records, scheduled meetings, obtained consents; its timeline was reasonable and partly delayed by parent/attorney | Held: DISD satisfied child-find — its request to evaluate within three months and completion in ~7 months was reasonable under circumstances |
| Whether procedural violations denied Kelsey a FAPE and whether reimbursement is warranted | Woody: DISD’s failure to offer temporary FAPE and failure to finalize/reconvene regarding IEE impeded right to FAPE; reimbursement warranted | DISD: parents frustrated process; would not have accepted DISD offer; graduation moots obligations; equitable defenses argue against reimbursement | Held: DISD committed procedural violations that per se impeded Kelsey’s right to a FAPE for 2013–2014; equitable allocation of responsibility reduces reimbursement to 18 weeks (half tuition). Transportation and LAUSD counseling claims denied. |
Key Cases Cited
- Cypress-Fairbanks Independent School District v. Michael F., 118 F.3d 245 (5th Cir. 1997) (district court must give due weight to hearing officer but reach independent decision)
- Bd. of Educ. v. Rowley, 458 U.S. 176 (U.S. 1982) (IEP procedural/substantive framework; Rowley two-part inquiry)
- Forest Grove School Dist. v. T.A., 557 U.S. 230 (U.S. 2009) (reimbursement/remedy principles when district fails to identify/provide FAPE)
- Burlington v. Dept. of Ed., 471 U.S. 359 (U.S. 1985) (equitable reimbursement for private placement when public placement inappropriate)
- Carter v. Florence County Sch. Dist. Four, 510 U.S. 7 (U.S. 1993) (standards for reimbursement when parents unilaterally place child in private school)
- Adam J. ex rel. Robert J. v. Keller Indep. Sch. Dist., 328 F.3d 804 (5th Cir. 2003) (procedural violation analysis pre-2004; adequacy and harm principles)
- Sam K. ex rel. Diane C. v. Hawaii Dep’t of Educ., 788 F.3d 1033 (9th Cir. 2015) (district tacit consent to private placement can affect reimbursement analysis)
- Regional Sch. Unit 51 v. Doe, 920 F. Supp. 2d 168 (D. Me. 2013) (failure to provide timely IEP/recognize eligibility can deny FAPE)
- Blackman v. District of Columbia, 277 F. Supp. 2d 71 (D.D.C. 2003) (failure to provide any IEP constitutes denial of FAPE)
- D.A. v. Houston Indep. Sch. Dist., 716 F. Supp. 2d 603 (S.D. Tex. 2009) (compensatory claims survive student graduation where claim concerns prior denial)