Phillip C. Ex Rel. A.C. v. Jefferson County Board of Education
701 F.3d 691
11th Cir.2012Background
- Board challenges district court’s affirmation of a federal regulation requiring reimbursement for a parent’s independent educational evaluation (IEE).
- 34 C.F.R. § 300.502(b)(1) provides public funding for an IEE when a parent disagrees with a public evaluation.
- Alabama mirrored this requirement in state regulations, obligating public funding of IEEs.
- Parents obtained an IEE for their child A.C. after disagreeing with the Board’s evaluations; Board refused to reimburse.
- Hearing Officer ruled in favor of reimbursement; district court affirmed; Board appealed asserting regulatory and statutory defenses.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether 34 C.F.R. § 300.502 is valid under the IDEA. | Board argues regulation exceeds IDEA authority. | Board contends Congress implicitly delegated reimbursement decisions to states. | regulation valid; within Congress’s intent |
| Whether the Hearing Officer had jurisdiction to order reimbursement. | Board asserts claim not related to FAPE due to misalignment with reimbursement. | Board contends lack of jurisdiction over reimbursement issue. | Hearing Officer had jurisdiction; order proper |
| Whether the IEE qualifies for public reimbursement under § 300.502. | Board argues IEE did not meet agency criteria and thus not reimbursable. | Parents’ IEE satisfies statutory and regulatory requirements for public funding. | IEE qualifies for reimbursement |
Key Cases Cited
- Winkelman v. Parma City Sch. Dist., 550 U.S. 516 (2007) (parents’ right to participate in IEP process; public financing aids meaningful participation)
- Schaffer ex rel. Schaffer v. Weast, 546 U.S. 49 (2005) (burden of proof in IEP-related disputes; parental involvement)
- Barnhart v. Sigmon Coal Co., 534 U.S. 438 (2002) (statutory interpretation; discerning congressional intent)
- Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (1984) (agency deference for reasonable interpretations of statutes)
- Honig v. Doe, 484 U.S. 305 (1988) (parental participation in IDEA processes; safeguards importance)
- Forest Grove Sch. Dist. v. TA, 557 U.S. 230 (2009) (reenactment doctrine; reimbursement under IDEA framework)
- Lorillard v. Pons, 434 U.S. 575 (1978) (reenactment doctrine applicability of prior interpretations)
- G.J. v. Muscogee Cnty. Sch. Dist., 688 F.3d 1258 (11th Cir. 2012) (private assessments rights independent of IDEA financing)