CS vs. Dunmore School District

Special Education Hearing Officer


Child’s Name: CS

Date of Birth: xx/xx/xx

Date of Hearing: June 23, 2009


ODR No. 9899/08-09 KE

Parties to the Hearing:

Parents :

School District:
Richard McDonald, Superintendent Dunmore School District
300 W. Warren Street
Dunmore, PA 18512


Pro Se

School District Attorney: Harold McGrath, Esq. McGrath Law Office
321 Spruce Street, Suite 600 Scranton, PA 18503

Date Record Closed: July 1, 2009

Date of Decision: July 3, 2009

Hearing Officer: Daniel J. Myers


Student (Student)1 is an early teen aged student in the Dunmore School District’s (District) elementary center who was not identified as a child with a disability when last evaluated in January 2007. The dispute between the parties concerns who will perform an independent educational evaluation (IEE) at public expense. Student requests a particular evaluator from a different part of the state whose fees may be higher than evaluators typically used by the District. The District wants the Parent to choose from a District list of evaluators. I conclude that the District has failed to comply with regulations that otherwise permit school districts to restrict parental choice of a publicly funded IEE evaluator. Accordingly, in this case I find for Student’s parent.


Whether an IEE at public expense shall be conducted by one of the evaluators on a District list, or by Dr. R, an evaluator preferred by Student’s parent who is not on the District’s list?


Leave a Reply


Montgomery Law, LLC
1420 Locust Street, Suite 420
Philadelphia, PA 19102
T/F. 215-650-7563

Rate By
Joseph W Montgomery, II

New Jersey

Historic Smithville, Suite 1
1 N. New York Road
Galloway, NJ 08205
(all mail to Phila. office)
T. 856-282-5550

Disclaimer: Montgomery Law, LLC does not give legal advice until after it has entered into an attorney-client relationship. No part of this website creates an attorney-client relationship. All Parts of this website are Attorney Advertising. The photos and videos on this website contain portrayals of clients by non-clients, re-enactment of scenes, pictures and persons which are not actual or authentic and depictions which are a dramatization.