991 F. Supp. 2d 209
D.D.C.2013Background
- Defendants Martha Oliver and Jeffrey Crater seek funding under IDEA § 1415(j) to place K.C. at the Lab School of Washington for 2013–2014.
- K.C. is a child with disabilities residing in DC who has never attended DC public schools.
- The DCPS denied developing an IEP for K.C. and the private placement began in 2012–2013 after parental funding concerns.
- The HOD found DCPS violated IDEA by not providing an IEP and ordered funding at the private school for remainder of 2012–2013 and to develop an IEP by December 2012.
- DCPS refused to fund the 2013–2014 private placement, prompting plaintiffs to seek stay-put relief; hearing held November 13, 2013.
- The court grants the motion, applying the IDEA stay-put framework to preserve the child’s current placement pending appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the private school placement is the child’s current educational placement under IDEA. | Oliver/Crater: current placement is defined by the IEP; without an IEP, there is no current placement. | Oliver/Crater: stay-put applies to the current placement where the child is receiving services, here the private school. | Yes; the court finds the private school is the current educational placement for stay-put purposes. |
| Whether granting stay-put would resolve merits of DCPS’s appeal. | Granting stay-put would function as a merits decision on the underlying HOD. | Stay-put relief is non-merits-based and preserves placement pending appeal. | Not a merits ruling; stay-put relief does not preclude ongoing appeal of the HOD. |
Key Cases Cited
- Drinker by Drinker v. Colonial Sch. Dist., 78 F.3d 859 (3d Cir. 1996) (stay-put treated as automatic injunction under IDEA)
- Laster v. District of Columbia, 439 F. Supp. 2d 93 (D.D.C. 2006) (stay-put presumption in favor of current placement)
- Honig v. Doe, 484 U.S. 305 (U.S. 1988) (stay-put presumption and equitable considerations)
- Andersen by Andersen v. District of Columbia, 877 F.2d 1018 (D.C. Cir. 1989) (stay-put lacks the traditional four-part test when applicable)
- District of Columbia v. Vinyard, 901 F. Supp. 2d 77 (D.D.C. 2012) (private placement can constitute current placement for stay-put)
- Mangum v. Renton Sch. Dist., 2011 WL 307376 (W.D. Wash. 2011) ((cited for stay-put reasoning on IEP absence))
- Thomas v. Cincinnati Bd. of Educ., 918 F.2d 618 (6th Cir. 1990) (educational placement not limited to school building)