TE vs. Cumberland Valley School District

Special Education Hearing Officer


Child’s Name: T.E.

Date of Birth: [redacted]

Dates of Hearing: October 31, 2012 December 7, 2012 December 18, 2012


ODR Case # 3472-1213KE

Parties to the Hearing: Parents

Cumberland Valley School District 6746 Carlisle Pike Mechanicsburg, PA 17050


Vivian Narehood, Esq. Gibbel, Kraybill & Hess 41 East Orange Street Lancaster, PA 17602

Mark Walz, Esq.
Sweet, Stevens, Katz & Williams 331 East Butler Avenue
P.O. Box 5069
New Britain, PA 18901

Date Record Closed: January 14, 2013

Date of Decision: January 22, 2013

Hearing Officer: Jake McElligott, Esquire


Student is a [teenaged] student residing in the Cumberland Valley School District (“District”). The parties do not dispute whether the student qualifies as a student with a disability under the Individuals with Disabilities in Education Improvement Act of 2004 (“IDEIA”)1. Parents claim that the District owes the parents tuition reimbursement for a unilateral private placement undertaken for the 2012-2013 school year because the District’s proposed program and placement is not designed to provide a free appropriate public education (“FAPE”) to the student. The District counters that its 2012-2013 program and placement provide FAPE to the student and, as such, parents are not entitled to tuition reimbursement.

For the reasons set forth below, I find in favor of the District.


Are the parents entitled to tuition reimbursement for the unilateral private placement undertaken for the 2012-2013 school year?


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.