KC vs. School District of Philadelphia

Pennsylvania
Special Education Hearing Officer

FINAL DECISION AND ORDER

Student’s Name: K.C.

Date of Birth: [redacted]

ODR No. 16658-1516AS

CLOSED HEARING

Parties to the Hearing: Parent[s]

School District of Philadelphia 440 N. Broad Street Philadelphia, PA 19130

Representative:

Pro Se

Judy Baskin, Esq.
School District of Philadelphia Office of General Counsel
440 N. Broad Street, Suite 300 Philadelphia, PA 19130

Dates of Hearing: N/A

Record Closed: 09/04/2015

Date of Decision: 09/04/2015

Hearing Officer: Brian Jason Ford

Introduction and Procedural History

This is a final order, dismissing the captioned special education due process hearing.

This special education due process hearing was requested by (Grandparent). The Grandparent is the grandparent and guardian of Student. The Grandparent represents herself and the Student without an attorney. The Grandparent requested this hearing against the School District of Philadelphia (District) for the sole purpose of having a special education evaluation report destroyed. Both the Grandparent and District agree that the Student is not eligible for special education. There is no dispute concerning the provision of a free appropriate public education (FAPE).

The procedural history of this case is set forth in my Order Granting Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss (Order), which is attached as Appendix A. The Order was sent to the parties on August 28, 2015. In the Order, I explained that I do not have authority to hear the claims raised in the Grandparent’s complaint, and dismissed this matter on that basis. However, I also recognized the Grandparent’s pro se status, and feared that the Grandparent did not receive all of the correspondence in this case – especially email. To mitigate this, the Order was set to automatically stay itself if the Grandparent responded to the District’s Motion to Dismiss on or before September 4, 2015. The Order was sent by email and certified mail.

On September 1, 2015, the Grandparent contacted the District, indicating that the Grandparent did not want this hearing to be dismissed. The District, via counsel, reported that contact to me. Then, with the District’s consent, I contacted the Grandparent ex parte to explain that the response must be sent to me, with a copy to the District’s attorney.

After the call, on September 1, 2015, the Grandparent sent two emails to me. Together, in substance, they say that (1) the Grandparent does not want this hearing to be dismissed, (2) the Grandparent did not receive an email from me sent on August 18, 2015 because the family was out of town, (3) that the evaluation report is inaccurate and misleading and, (4) the report was not kept confidential.

Per my Order of August 28, I accept these emails as a motion to reconsider the dismissal of this due process hearing.

Conclusion

The Grandparent has asked for a records hearing, either under FERPA or IDEA regulations at 34 C.F.R. § 300.618. Neither of those are a special education due process hearing. The Grandparent has a right to a records hearing, but I cannot convene that type of hearing. I can only convene a special education due process hearing. Therefore, I must dismiss this case.

K-C-Philadelphia-ODRNo-16658-1516AS

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.