Pennsylvania
Special Education Hearing Officer
DECISION
Child’s Name: K.N.
Date of Birth: [redacted]
ODR No. 3128-11-12-KE
EXPEDITED HEARING CLOSED HEARING
Parties to the Hearing: Parent
Tunkhannock School District 41 Philadelphia Avenue
Tunkhannock, PA 18657
Parties to the Hearing: Parent
Tunkhannock School District 41 Philadelphia Avenue
Tunkhannock, PA 18657
Representative:
Heather Hulse, Esquire McAndrews Law Offices 30 Cassatt Avenue Berwyn, PA 19312
William McPartland, Esquire
Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin
50 Glemaura National Boulevard Moosic, PA 18507
Date of Hearing: May 31, 2012
Record Closed: June 11, 2012
Date of Decision: June 12, 2012
Hearing Officer: Linda M. Valentini, Psy.D., CHO
Background
Student is a high school aged student residing in the District and enrolled in a District school. The Parent asked for this hearing to challenge the District’s conclusion that certain behaviors in question were not a manifestation of Student’s disability.
The hearing was conducted in one session on an expedited basis. I conclude that the District’s procedure in conducting the manifestation determination was inappropriate, although I find that the District’s conclusion that the behavior was not a manifestation of Student’s disability was correct.
Issues
Were the District’s manifestation determination procedures appropriate?
Were Student’s behaviors a manifestation of Student’s disability?
If the District incorrectly determined that Student’s behaviors were not a manifestation of Student’s disability, should the District provide Student with compensatory education for days of suspension and take any action with regard to the police and the courts?
K-N-Tunkhannock-ODRNo-3128-11-12-KE