Browse cases by category
- Attorneys & Legal Services
- Bankruptcy
- Civil Procedure & Administrative Law
- Civil Rights
- Consumer
- Criminal
- Disability
- Economic Development
- Education
- Elections
- Employment
- Environmental Justice
- Evidence
- Family Law
- Food Programs
- Government and Governmental Services
- Guardianship & Conservatorship
- Health
- Housing
- Immigration
- Juveniles
- License (Auto & Others)
- Mental Health
- Migrants
- Native Americans
- Other
- Prisons
- Public Utilities & Energy
- Rural Issues
- Senior Citizens
- Social Security & SSI
- Taxation
- Torts
- Unemployment Compensation & Unemployment Insurance
- Veterans & Military
- Welfare
- Wills & Estates
- Workforce Development
Smith v. Wheaton
H-87-190 (D. Conn. Apr. 26, 2000). ; Clearinghouse Number: 53006
Description
Students at Juvenile Detention Facility Are Entitled to Special Education Assessments Under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
Abstract
The district court barred local school boards from implementing
restrictive local policies that delay or prevent effective
diagnosis of a juvenile’s special education needs and that
conflict with federal law. In their class action against defendant
state Board of Education, Department of Children and Families, and
other state officials, plaintiffs—mentally disabled students
of a juvenile detention facility—claimed that
defendants’ policy of prohibiting the release of educational
records without parental or guardian consent violated the
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and Section 504 of the
Rehabilitation Act. The court ruled that the local boards must
release complete school records to the juvenile facility in a
timely manner to minimize disruptions to educational progress. The
parties disagreed on the scope of special education and related
services and on the placement and discharge procedures required
under the Act. The court found that the law required that students
be provided with “personalized instruction with sufficient
support services to permit the child to benefit educationally from
that instruction.” It also held that if a local school did
not have a special education program when a juvenile was
discharged, the juvenile facility staff had a legal duty to
complain to the state department of education, and the juvenile
must be placed elsewhere. Finding that plaintiffs prevailed on four
of the five key issues, the court awarded them $657,610 in attorney
fees.
