A recent case of interest, Forest Grove School District v. Student, No. 3:14-CV-00444-AC, 2018 WL 6198281, 118 LRP 48402 (D. Or. Nov. 27, 2018), covered a wide range of issues. Of particular interest was the court’s ruling that limitations the district had imposed on emails from the parents to school personnel did not seriously infringe on the parents’ opportunity to participate in formulation of the student’s IEP. The communication protocol initially channeled all the parents’ email communications to a single administrator to save other school personnel from what the court characterized as an overwhelming volume of emails, many of them dealing with ongoing litigation. The administrator would respond once a week. Eventually, the school district adopted a protocol channeling the communications to the district’s legal counsel. The court emphasized the sheer number of messages and that they were viewed as “terse and intimidating,” and included those involving matters that needed a legal response. Id. at *14. Moreover, the parents were represented by counsel and continued to have access to school staff by telephone and in person, and they participated extensively in IEP meetings.
45-day timeline Accommodations Accrual of Claims Advocates Attorneys' Fees Auhtority to Reopen Case behavioral intervention Calculating timelines Challenging Academic Standards Child-Find Discovery Rule District-Wide Assessment ESSA ESY Evaluation Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies Expedited Due Process Hearings FAPE Finality of IHO Decision IEP Implementation Independent Evaluators KOSHK Least Restrictive Environment LRE Maintenance of Placement Mediation Methodology Mootness Participation Rights placement Police Intervention Reconsideration of Decision Religious Instruction Residency Retaining Jurisdiction Scope of Due Process Hearings Section 504 SOL Statute of Limitations Stay-put Sufficiency of Due Process Complaint Timelines Tolling Transition Services Tuition Reimbursement