If you have a question or concern about special education law, school administration, federal standards, or the overall rights of a student, please feel free to call the expert education law attorneys at Maya Murphy, P.C. in Westport today at (203) 221-3100 .
An OCR complaint is not a substitute for a due process hearing, as a parent discovered when a District Court dismissed her discrimination lawsuit against a Connecticut district. The court explained that it could not exercise jurisdiction over the parent's IDEA, ADA and Section 504 claims until she exhausted her administrative remedies under the IDEA.
IDEA and Connecticut Due Process
To comply with the IDEA, Connecticut has enacted a series of statutes and regulations governing the provision of a FAPE to children who require special education and related services and the administrative process that must be followed. Conn. Gen. Stat. § 10-76a, et seq.; Conn. Agency Regs. § 10-76a-1, et seq. Under these statutes and regulations, the local board of education must accept and process a referral from, inter alia, a child's parent to determine a child's eligibility for special education and related services. Each child who has been referred for such a determination must be evaluated by a PPT. If the PPT determines that the child is eligible for special education and related services, the PPT must develop an IEP. Parents who are not satisfied with the IEP may request, in writing, a hearing by an impartial hearing officer regarding the proposal or refusal to initiate or change the identification, evaluation, or educational placement of the child or the provision of a FAPE to the child. The hearing officer must issue written findings of fact and conclusions of law. The decision may be appealed to federal or state court.
The court acknowledged that the parent filed a series of complaints with OCR concerning the district's alleged refusal to evaluate her sons' eligibility for IDEA services. However, the court observed, the parent never requested a due process hearing to compel an evaluation and eligibility determination. The failure to seek administrative relief proved fatal to the parent's suit. "It is the exhaustion of the IDEA's administrative procedures, not procedures under Section 504, that is the prerequisite for bringing an action in federal or state court alleging the denial of a FAPE under the IDEA, Section 504, the ADA, Section 1983, or any other cause of action," U.S. District Judge Alan H. Nevas. Because the IDEA's administrative procedures provided some form of relief for the harm alleged, the parent had to exhaust her administrative remedies before filing suit.
If you have a child with a disability and have questions about special education law, please contact Joseph C. Maya, Esq., at 203-221-3100, or at JMaya@mayalaw.com, to schedule a free consultation.
For continuous access to the legal world, follow us on Twitter and LinkedIn. We offer the latest updates on caselaw and legal news. In addition, informational videos are available for your convenience on our YouTube channel.
Source- Alan H. Nevas, Opinion Ruling on Pending Motions, National Disability Law Reporter, US District Court, Connecticut, Mar. 31, 2008
