The members of Harbottle Law Group have had consistent success at all levels of their specialized Education Law practice. We have successfully represented school districts at the administrative law level, to the trial court level, through the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, as well in the United States Supreme Court. Summaries of some of these successes follow, and are in addition to a substantial number of special education due process hearings in which we have assisted districts in prevailing:
Successful Defense of District Assessments Of Non-English Speaking Student
In this case, the student moved to the U.S. at 16 and, at the time, spoke no English. After 2 years in the U.S. and 1 year of formal education in the U.S., the student’s immigration attorney requested special education assessments. The District timely conducted the assessments and found Student ineligible. Student’s attorney then requested an IEE after disagreeing with the finding of non-eligibility. The District denied the IEE request and filed for due process to defend its assessments. The ALJ held that the District assessors were qualified and their assessments were appropriate...
School District Acted Reasonably, and Student’s Guardian Caused Undue Delay In Conducting Annual IEP
Districts often face what they believe to be undue, and sometimes calculated delay, on parents’ part in cooperating to permit the District to conduct IEP team meetings in line with statutory requirements. As a result of the missing of such deadlines, parents then file for due process claiming procedural and/or substantive FAPE violations. In this case, Student’s guardian had removed him from the District in 2007 and enrolled him full-time in an NPA for 1:1 instruction. During a later period of 13 full months, the District attempted to hold Student’s triennial assessment and IEP meeting...
Successful Autism Programming Defense in Ninth Circuit
We successfully represented a large Southern California school district in a case involving a challenge to the district’s independent educational
evaluator classroom observation policy. The parents had sought approximately $250,000 in reimbursements for autism programming and attorneys’ fees,
but the Ninth Circuit ruled in favor of the district...
Successful Ninth Circuit Defense of District's FAPE offer to SLD Student
We also represented another large California school district in defense of a claim by parents that the district had falsified the grades and progress reports
of a learning disabled student through his entire high school career. The Office of Administrative Hearings, the federal district court, and the Ninth Circuit
all ruled in favor of the district, finding that its program was solid, that its teachers and other witnesses were highly qualified and credible.
Successful Defense of a District's Right to Terminate an NPA Autism Provider
In a federal district court case, we successfully defended a district’s right to terminate an NPA that was not complying with its contract terms.
The parents had challenged the district’s right to make this change, arguing that the provider was an inherent part of the student’s IEP.
However, we succeeded in convincing the court of the district’s independent authority to terminate private contracts for sub-standard private providers.
Successful OAH Due Process Hearing: Student Found Ineligible for Special Education as Seriously Emotionally Disturbed
Parents had withdrawn student from public school and enrolled her in a therapeutic boarding school. After many months in this placement,
her parents then demanded public funding for the prior year’s placement claiming that District had erroneously found her ineligible for special education.
The District prevailed on all issues, successfully defending its assessment results and against all other claims. In a lengthy, and detailed Decision,
OAH agreed that student was ineligible and denied all of student’s requests. The case is hyperlinked below, and is useful for analyzing the numerous
aspects of the emotional disturbance analysis...
Successful Ninth Circuit Defense Against Attorneys’ Fee Claim in Statutory 10-Day Offer Context
The District had made a statutory 10-day offer under the IDEA which was accepted the very next day without condition by student. However, student immediately
sought an order from OAH that it “enter judgment” on the terms of the settlement. Student’s intent was to collect attorneys’ fees as “prevailing party” under
the settlement. OAH declined to enter judgment, as did the trial court, and the Ninth Circuit also ruled in favor of the District.
District to Provide Student His Earned Diploma and Discontinue His Special Education Services
An adult student’s individual transition plan (“ITP”) had indicated that he was to be on a “Certificate of Completion” rather than on a full diploma track because when his ITP was created, the California Education Code required that student take and pass the California High School Exit Exam (“CAHSEE”). However, after creation of student’s ITP, the Education Code was amended creating an exception to the CAHSEE for student such as the student in this case, who had met all statutory requirements for graduation with a full diploma, except having passed the CAHSEE. The District conducted an IEP and offered Student a diploma, rather than a Certificate of Completion, but his Parent declined and filed for due process stating her intention to continue receiving special education services for the 3 years until Student’s 22nd birthday. The Office of Administrative Hearings ruled in favor of the District and permitted the District to provide Student his earned diploma and discontinue his special education services.