Taylor v. District of Columbia
2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26961
D.D.C.2011Background
- Taylor seeks review of a IDEA decision denying her son's FAPE due to DCPS's delay in approving an independent evaluation.
- K.T. attended Amidon Elementary from kindergarten (2004) through 2008-2009 with multiple behavior incidents and removals.
- DCPS conducted a psychological evaluation on April 4, 2008, finding K.T. not eligible for special education; MDT adjourned to obtain more information.
- Plaintiff requested an independent evaluation at public expense on June 5, 2008; DCPS delayed responding and did not authorize until October 2008.
- A due process hearing was held October 22, 2008; the hearing officer found a procedural violation for delay but no denial of a FAPE.
- Court denies summary judgment and remands to the hearing officer to consider newly-proffered post-HOD evidence regarding eligibility and compensatory education.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether delay in authorizing an independent evaluation denied FAPE | Taylor asserts procedural delay caused educational harm, constituting denial of FAPE. | DCPS argues procedural delay did not harm substantive rights and thus did not deny FAPE. | Remand allowed to assess new evidence; no per se denial established. |
| Whether new post-HOD evidence may be considered | Post-HOD independent evaluation shows eligibility and need for services. | Court should not consider evidence not presented to the hearing officer. | Remand to hear newly-proffered evidence and evaluate impact on FAPE. |
| Appropriate relief given potential FAPE denial | If denial, K.T. is entitled to compensatory education. | Relief should await findings from remand. | Remand for fact-finding and possible compensatory relief; summary judgment denied without prejudice. |
Key Cases Cited
- Lesesne v. District of Columbia, 447 F.3d 828 (D.C. Cir. 2006) (procedural violations require educational harm to deny FAPE)
- Reid v. District of Columbia, 401 F.3d 516 (D.C. Cir. 2005) (court reviews IDEA decisions with deference to administrative findings)
- Henry v. District of Columbia, 750 F. Supp. 2d 94 (D.D.C. 2010) (court may remand for further proceedings under IDEA)
- Konkel v. Elmbrook Sch. Dist., 348 F. Supp. 2d 1018 (E.D. Wis. 2004) (district courts retain discretion to hear additional evidence)
- Branham v. District of Columbia, 427 F.3d 7 (D.C. Cir. 2005) (illustrates remand vs. direct judgment in IDEA appeals)