School District For Student's Special Education Falls Outside Jurisdiction
by
Joseph C. Maya on Apr. 24, 2017
Other Education Criminal Juvenile Law Civil & Human Rights Civil Rights
Summary: Blog post about the laws regarding accommodations that must be met by the state to make sure that special education students receive a proper education.
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 .
In the case of Tirella v. Region 16 School District, a parent appealed the decision of the Connecticut Department of Education that dismissed her claim against a regional school district due to lack of jurisdiction. Her claim against the region was in regard to the special education program offered to her daughter.
The parent of a child in need of special education, requested a hearing before the Connecticut Department of Education, claiming that the defendant school district in which her child was enrolled was negligent and violated the law. The department dismissed her claim, as plaintiff and her child did not reside in defendant's district, but in another district which had contracted with defendant to provide special education to plaintiff's child. Plaintiff appealed, and the court affirmed. Under both the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), and its state counterpart, the school district in which the disabled child resided was responsible for her education, even if it met that responsibility by contracting it out to another district. It is important to note that Connecticut law provides that a board of education may discharge its obligation to provide special education for its students by entering into an agreement with another regional school board. However, it is clear that the obligation to provide such special education services remains with the town of residence of the child in question, regardless of how the town's school district chooses to discharge its obligation to provide such services. The department properly ruled that it lacked jurisdiction to hear plaintiff's claim.
The court dismissed the appeal, because under Connecticut law, the school district responsible for providing appropriate education to disabled children was the district in which the child resided, even though it had contracted with another district to provide such services. “Under the federal statute a school district remains responsible for disabled children residing within the district who receive free appropriate education in a placement outside the district” said the court. “Residency remains the touchstone for determining the identity of the responsible local educational agencies for purposes of a due process hearing.”
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.
Source: Tirella v. Region 16 Sch. Dist., 2000 Conn. Super. LEXIS 3411 (Conn. Super. Ct. Dec. 18, 2000)
