Decisions

This proceeding arises under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. §§ 1400-1482) and Article 89 of the New York State Education Law.  Petitioner (the district) appeals from a decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which found that it failed to offer an appropriate educational program to respondents' (the parents') son for the 2021-22 and 2022-23 school years and ordered it to fund compensatory services and independent educational evaluations (IEEs).  Respondents (the parents) cross-appeal certain aspects of the compensatory award and the IHO's dismissal of the claims for the 2019-20 and 2020-21 school years. The appeal must be sustained in part.  The cross-appeal must be sustained in part.

This proceeding arises under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. §§ 1400-1482) and Article 89 of the New York State Education Law.  Petitioner (the parent) appeals from those portions of a decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which denied her requests for specific relief upon finding that respondent (the district) failed to provide her son with an appropriate educational program for the 2021-22, 2022-23, and 2023-24 school years.  The appeal must be sustained in part.

This proceeding arises under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. §§ 1400-1482) and Article 89 of the New York State Education Law.  Petitioner (the parent) appeals from a decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which denied her request that respondent (the district) reimburse her for the costs of her son's tuition at the Brain Balance School (Brain Balance) for the 2023-24 school year.  The appeal must be dismissed.

This proceeding arises under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. §§ 1400-1482) and Article 89 of the New York State Education Law.  Petitioner (the parent) appeals from a decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which denied in part her request that respondent (the district) fund the full costs of her daughter's private services delivered by Kinship Resources LLC (Kinship) for the 2023-24 school year.  The district cross-appeals from those portions of the IHO's decision which found that the parent demonstrated the unilaterally obtained services were appropriate and granted relief.  The appeal must be dismissed.  The cross-appeal must be dismissed.

This proceeding arises under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. §§ 1400-1482) and Article 89 of the New York State Education Law.  Petitioner (the parent) appeals from a decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which denied her request to be reimbursed for her son's tuition at the Brehm Preparatory School (Brehm Prep) for the 2020-21 school year, Q&A Associates (Q&A) for the 2021-22 and 2022-23 school years.  The appeal must be dismissed.

This proceeding arises under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. §§ 1400-1482) and Article 89 of the New York State Education Law.  Petitioners (the parents) appeal from the decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which denied their request to be reimbursed for the costs of their daughter's tuition and expenses at the Landmark School (Landmark) for the 2021-22, 2022-23, and 2023-24 school years.  The appeal must be dismissed.

This proceeding arises under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. §§ 1400-1482) and Article 89 of the New York State Education Law.  Petitioner (the parent) appeals from a decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which denied her request that respondent (the district) fund the costs of her son's private special education teacher support services (SETSS) delivered by Always a Step Ahead, Inc. (Step Ahead) for the 2023-24 school year.  The district cross-appeals from that portion of the IHO's decision which directed the district to fund speech-language therapy and occupational therapy (OT) delivered by Step Ahead for the 2023-24 school year.  The appeal must be sustained.  The cross-appeal must be dismissed.

This proceeding arises under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. §§ 1400-1482) and Article 89 of the New York State Education Law.  Petitioner (the parent) appeals from the decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) to the extent it did not order respondent (the district) to fund the full costs under the parent's contract with Sisters Travel and Transportation Services, LLC (Sisters Travel) for transportation services for her daughter for the 2022-23 school year.  The district cross appeals from the IHO's interim decision on pendency, as well as from the IHO's determination that it failed to offer an appropriate educational program to the parent's daughter and ordered it to reimburse the parent for her daughter's tuition costs at the International Academy for the Brain (iBrain) for the 2022-23 school year.  The appeal must be sustained in part.  The cross-appeal must be sustained in part.  The matter must be remanded for further administrative proceedings.

This proceeding arises under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. §§ 1400-1482) and Article 89 of the New York State Education Law.  Petitioners (the parents) appeal from a decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which denied their request to be reimbursed for their son's tuition costs at the Irving Montak SINAI School at SAR Academy (SINAI School) for the 2020-21 and 2021-22 school years.  The appeal must be dismissed.

This proceeding arises under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. §§ 1400-1482) and Article 89 of the New York State Education Law.  Petitioners (the parents) appeal from a decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which denied their request to be reimbursed for their son's tuition at The Shefa School (Shefa) for the 2022-23 school year.  The district cross-appeals from that portion of the IHO's decision which found that Shefa was an appropriate unilateral placement and that equitable considerations favored the parent.  The appeal must be dismissed.  The cross-appeal must be dismissed.

This proceeding arises under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. §§ 1400-1482) and Article 89 of the New York State Education Law.  Petitioner (the parent) appeals from a decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which dismissed his due process complaint notice against respondent (the district) with prejudice.  The appeal must be dismissed.

Appeal Withdrawn

This proceeding arises under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. §§ 1400-1482) and Article 89 of the New York State Education Law.  Petitioner (the parent) appeals from a decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which denied her request that respondent (the district) fund the costs of her daughter's private services delivered by Kinship Resources, LLC (Kinship) for the 2023-24 school year.  The appeal must be sustained in part.

This proceeding arises under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. §§ 1400-1482) and Article 89 of the New York State Education Law.  Petitioner (the parent) appeals from a decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which denied her request that respondent (the district) fund the costs of her daughter's private services delivered by Yes I Can for the 2023-24 school year.  The appeal must be sustained, and the matter remanded to the IHO for further proceedings.

This proceeding arises under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. §§ 1400-1482) and Article 89 of the New York State Education Law.  Petitioner (the parent) appeals from a decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which denied her request that respondent (the district) fund the costs of her son's tuition and special transportation costs at the International Academy for the Brain (iBrain) for the 2023-24 school years and for an independent educational evaluation (IEE).  The district cross-appeals from those portions of the IHO's decision which denied the district's application to dismiss the parent's claims with regard to the 2021-22 school year as time-barred due to the statute of limitations; held that it failed to offer an appropriate educational program to the student for the 2021-22, 2022-23, and 2023-24 school years; and directed the district to conduct certain evaluations of the student.  The appeal must be sustained in part.  The cross-appeal must be sustained.

This proceeding arises under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. §§ 1400-1482) and Article 89 of the New York State Education Law.  Petitioner (the parent) appeals from the decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) that dismissed the parent's due process complaint without first determining his daughter's pendency placement during a due process proceeding challenging the appropriateness of respondent's (the district's) recommended educational program for the student for the 2023-24 school year.  The district cross-appeals from the IHO's failure to rule on its motion to dismiss and the award of compensatory relief.  The appeal must be dismissed. The cross-appeal must be sustained to the extent indicated.

This proceeding arises under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. §§ 1400-1482) and Article 89 of the New York State Education Law.  Petitioner (the parent) appeals from a decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO II) which denied her request to be reimbursed for her son's private services delivered by Applied ABC for the 2021-22 and 2022-23 school years and denied her request for reimbursement of a private evaluation.  The appeal must be sustained in part.

This proceeding arises under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. §§ 1400-1482) and Article 89 of the New York State Education Law.  Petitioner (the parent) appeals from a decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which denied her request to be reimbursed for her daughter's tuition costs at the Grove School and related transportation costs for the 2023-24 school year.  The appeal must be dismissed.

This proceeding arises under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. §§ 1400-1482) and Article 89 of the New York State Education Law.  Petitioners (the parents) appeal from a decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which denied their request that respondent (the district) fund the costs for their daughter's attendance at the International Academy for the Brain (iBrain) for the 2023-24 school year.  The appeal must be sustained in part and the matter remanded to the IHO for further proceedings.

This proceeding arises under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. §§ 1400-1482) and Article 89 of the New York State Education Law.  Petitioner (the parent) appeals from the decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which upheld a manifestation determination review (MDR) team's determination that the student's behavior was not a manifestation of her disability and sustained a school imposed disciplinary suspension during the 2023-24 school year.  The appeal must be dismissed.