RL vs. Philadelphia City School District

DECISION
Due Process Hearing for RL

ODR File No. 7551/06-07 LS

Date of Birth: xx/xx/xx

Date of Hearing: June 7, 2007 – Open Hearing

Parties to the Hearing:

(Parent)

Philadelphia City School District 440 North Broad Street, Suite 313 Philadelphia, PA 19130

Representative: None

Kenneth Cooper, Esq.
440 North Broad Street, 3rd Floor Philadelphia, PA 19130

Hearing Officer: Debra K. Wallet, Esq.

Record Closed: June 7, 2007

Transcript Received: June 12, 2007

Date of Decision: June 27, 2007

BACKGROUND:

Student is a xx-year-old (date of birth xx/xx/xx) tenth-grade student of the Philadelphia City School District [hereinafter School District] who has been diagnosed with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and Asperger’s Syndrome. Student is intellectually gifted and attends an elite magnet program with a concentration in aerospace and medical subjects. He has been generally successful in his academic career, but Father is concerned that Student’s lack of organization and attention to detail has negatively affected his grades and classroom success. Father requested a due process hearing because he believes that the School District has failed to follow the current Section 504 service agreement.

ISSUES:

  1. Has the School District failed to follow the Section 504 service agreement?
  2. Is the service agreement in need of revision?
RL-Philadelphia-City-ODRNo-7551-06-07-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.