Smith v. Tacoma School District
476 F.Supp.3d 1112
W.D. Wash.2020Background
- Plaintiff Jana Smith (pro se), grandparent and caregiver to minor C.M., appealed an ALJ decision affirming Tacoma School District’s January 8, 2019 reevaluation that exited C.M. from special education and denied an IEE at public expense.
- Reevaluation process: November–January meetings, BASC‑3 ratings from teachers/guardian, occupational therapy screening, short classroom observations; team concluded no adverse educational impact in school and exited C.M.; Smith requested an IEE on January 14, 2019.
- Smith alleges the reevaluation was procedurally and substantively deficient: insufficient assessment tools, failure to consider medical diagnoses (sensory disorder, anxiety, hyperkinesis), absence of the school nurse at the meeting, improper use of signatures/document manipulation, and unqualified teacher participation.
- District defended the reevaluation as using a variety of appropriate tools (observations, BASC‑3, TS‑Gold classroom data, parent/medical records review) and argued many of Smith’s broader FAPE/placement claims were unexhausted.
- Smith also asserted statutory claims (HIPAA, FERPA, 18 U.S.C. § 1505) and moved to supplement the record with an SSA benefits decision and to compel discovery.
- Court disposition: granted District summary judgment; denied Smith’s motions to submit SSA decision and to compel discovery; entered judgment for the District.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Appropriateness of reevaluation / entitlement to IEE | Reevaluation relied on too few/insufficient measures, ignored medical providers, and prematurely exited C.M.; requests IEE at public expense | Reevaluation used multiple appropriate tools and professionals; results supported exit; District offered to defend evaluation via due process | Court affirmed ALJ: reevaluation appropriate; no right to IEE at public expense granted |
| Exhaustion / FAPE and placement relief | Seeks reversal that District deprived C.M. of FAPE and requests specific placement/busing | These FAPE/placement claims were not litigated before the ALJ and are subject to IDEA exhaustion/state process | Court: claims seeking relief available under IDEA are unexhausted and must be pursued administratively first |
| Procedural complaints (notice of IEE rights, nurse attendance, signatures, teacher qualifications) | Procedural irregularities prejudiced parent participation and tainted evaluation | Either regulations did not require the alleged step, or any omission was harmless and did not prejudice meaningful participation | Court: ALJ’s factual findings supported; no prejudicial procedural violation shown; ALJ decision stands |
| Statutory claims (HIPAA, FERPA, 18 U.S.C. §1505) | District violated privacy and records law by mishandling and withholding documents | Those statutes do not create a private civil cause of action | Court: summary judgment for District — no private right of action under HIPAA, FERPA, or §1505 |
| Supplementing record / discovery (SSA decision, additional discovery) | SSA SSI decision and other records are relevant and should be added; seeks discovery | Post‑hoc SSA decision is not probative of educational functioning at reevaluation time; discovery unnecessary and untimely | Court denied motions: SSA decision not sufficiently relevant; discovery requests procedurally deficient and outside deadlines |
Key Cases Cited
- Endrew F. ex rel. Joseph F. v. Douglas Cty. Sch. Dist. RE‑1, 137 S. Ct. 988 (2017) (IEP must be reasonably calculated to enable appropriate progress)
- Fry v. Napoleon Cmty. Sch., 137 S. Ct. 743 (2017) (IDEA exhaustion required when relief sought is also available under IDEA)
- M.C. v. Antelope Valley Union High Sch. Dist., 858 F.3d 1189 (9th Cir. 2017) (scope of review and deference to ALJ decisions in IDEA cases)
- Ojai Unified Sch. Dist. v. Jackson, 4 F.3d 1467 (9th Cir. 1993) (administrative record is starting point for judicial review; limited additional evidence allowed)
- J.W. v. Fresno Unified Sch. Dist., 626 F.3d 431 (9th Cir. 2010) (standard of review for IDEA administrative decisions)
- Timothy O. v. Paso Robles Unified Sch. Dist., 822 F.3d 1105 (9th Cir. 2016) (procedural violations harmless only if no interference with parental participation or educational opportunity)
- Kutasi v. Las Virgenes Unified Sch. Dist., 494 F.3d 1162 (9th Cir. 2007) (policy reasons for IDEA exhaustion)
- Webb v. Smart Document Solutions, LLC, 499 F.3d 1078 (9th Cir. 2007) (HIPAA does not create a private right of action)
- Gonzaga Univ. v. Doe, 536 U.S. 273 (2002) (FERPA does not create enforceable private rights)