Advance Decisions Search

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 determined that the educational programs respondent's (the district's) Committee on Special Education (CSE) recommended for her son for the 2017-18 and 2018-19 school years were appropriate and denied, in part, the parent's requests for further evaluation of the student.  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 determined that the respondent (the district) was not responsible for the lack of implementation of the program and services recommended for her daughter by the Committee on Special Education (CSE)  for the 2018-19 school year.  The appeal must be sustained in part.

This proceeding arises under Article 89 of the New York State Education Law.  Petitioner (the district) appeals from the decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which awarded compensatory educational services to the student.  The 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.  Petitioners (the parents) appeal from the decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO 2) which dismissed without prejudice their request to be reimbursed for their daughter's tuition costs at the International Institute for the Brain (iBrain) for the 2018-19 school year. Respondent (the district) cross-appeals from IHO 2's dismissal without prejudice and requests referral back to IHO 2 for further proceedings.  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.  Petitioners (the parents) appeal, pursuant to section 8 NYCRR 279.10(d) of the Regulations of the Commissioner of Education, from an interim decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) determining their son's pendency (stay put) placement during a due process proceeding challenging the respondent's (the district's) issuance of a local diploma to the student in June 2019.  The 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.  Petitioners (the parents) appeal from a decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which determined that the educational program respondent's (the district's) Committee on Preschool Special Education (CPSE) had recommended for their son for a portion of the 2017-18 and 2018-19 school years was appropriate.  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.  Petitioners (the parents) appeal from the interim and final decisions of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which directed evaluations of the student to be conducted and the respondent's (the district's) Committee on Special Education (CSE) to reconvene in order to recommend an appropriate program for the student.  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 the decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which determined that the evaluations conducted by the respondent's (the district's) Committee on Special Education (CSE) were appropriate and denied her request for certain independent educational evaluations (IEEs) for her daughter.  The appeal must be sustained in part.

Appeal Withdrawn.

Appeal Withdrawn.

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 the decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which denied her request to be reimbursed for her daughter's tuition costs at a nonpublic school (NPS) for the 2016-17 school year.  Respondent (the district) cross-appeals from the IHO's denial of its motion to dismiss the parent's claims based on the IDEA's statute of limitations.  The appeal must be dismissed.  The cross-appeal must be sustained in part and, for reasons explained more fully below, the matter must be remanded to the IHO for further administrative proceedings.

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 district) appeals from the decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which determined that the student was eligible for special education and related services for the 2018-19 school year and ordered the district to fund a functional behavior assessment (FBA) of the student as an independent educational evaluation (IEE).  The parents cross-appeal from that portion of the IHO's decision which denied their request for a neuropsychological evaluation of the student as an IEE.  The appeal must be sustained in part.  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 determined that the educational program and services respondent's (the district's) Committee on Special Education (CSE) had recommended for her son for the 2018-19 school year were appropriate.  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.  Petitioners (the parents) appeal from the decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which denied their request to be reimbursed for their son's tuition costs at Bonim Lamokom (Bonim) for the 2018-19 school year.  The appeal must be sustained.

Appeal Unperfected.

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 dismissed the parent's claims related to the 2015-16 school year as barred by the IDEA's statute of limitations and further denied the relief sought by the parent to remedy respondent's (the district's) failure to provide her son with an appropriate educational program for the 2016-17, 2017-18, and 2018-19 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 the decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which denied her request to be reimbursed for the costs of the student's tuition and related services at the International Institute for the Brain (iBrain) for the 2018-19 school year.  The appeal must be dismissed.