JE vs. Boyertown Area School District

Pennsylvania
Special Education Hearing Officer

DECISION

Child’s Name: JE

Date of Birth: xx/xx/xxxx

ODR No. 00101-0910 LS

CLOSED HEARING

Parties to the Hearing:

Boyertown Area School District 120 North Monroe Street Boyertown, PA 19512

Representative:

Frederick M. Stanczak, Esquire 179 North Broad Street Doylestown, PA 18901

Jennifer Donaldson, Esquire Sweet, Stevens, Katz & Williams 331 East Butler Avenue
P.O. Box 5069
New Britain, PA 18901

Date of Ruling: April 1, 2010

Hearing Officer: William F. Culleton, Jr., Esquire

INTRODUCTION

(Student) is a seventeen year old eligible resident of the Boyertown Area School District (District); he is in tenth grade at the [Redacted School] in [Redacted city] Pennsylvania. (NT 20-6 to 16, 506-8 to 13, 515-16 to 18.) [REDACTED SCHOOL] is a private school that provides college preparatory education to students with learning differences. (NT 507-24 to 508-13.) The Student is identified with Autism.

In July 2009, the District offered the Student an IEP with part time inclusion and part time placement in its own autistic support class at Boyertown Area Senior High School (BASH). (NT 21-12 to 14; S-19 pp. 54 to 56.) The Parents requested due process on July 27, 2009, amending their complaint on September 2, 2009. (P-14.) They asserted that the District’s offered program and placement were inappropriate and that the IEP planning process was inappropriate because the District refused to conduct the IEP meeting at [REDACTED SCHOOL] so that the Student and his teachers could participate. Ibid. They requested tuition reimbursement for the 2009-2010 school year. Ibid. They also requested an order that the District was liable to pay for tuition and transportation during the pendency of this matter.

The District asserted that its July 2009 offered program and placement, as revised in an IEP offered in August 2009, was appropriate. They requested that tuition reimbursement be denied for that reason and based upon equitable considerations. (P-14 pp. 277 to 281.) They also challenged certain statutory claims.1 They requested an order that pendency does not apply and that the Parents should reimburse the District for tuition and travel costs for the 2009-2010 school year.

ISSUES

  1. Did the District make a free appropriate public education available to the student in a timely manner for the 2009-2010 school year?
  2. Is the [REDACTED SCHOOL] an appropriate placement for the Student for the 2009-2010 school year?
  3. Should the hearing officer order the District to pay the cost of tuition and transportation of the Student to [REDACTED SCHOOL] for the 2009-2010 school year?
JE-Boyertown-Area-ODRNo-00101-0910-LS

Leave a Reply

Pennsylvania

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

Rate By
SUPER LAWYERS
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.