TITLE

NO IDEA WHAT THE FUTURE HOLDS: THE RETROSPECTIVE EVIDENCE DILEMMA

AUTHOR(S)
Fan, Dennis
PUB. DATE
October 2014
SOURCE
Columbia Law Review;Oct2014, Vol. 114 Issue 6, p1503
SOURCE TYPE
Academic Journal
DOC. TYPE
Article
ABSTRACT
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act's predecessor established a multilevel administrative and judicial review system for special education decisions, and ever since, the volume of special education cases in federal court has ballooned. Most present cases involve disputes over whether the school district drafted an individualized education program capable of providing a child with disabilities a "free appropriate public education." But what evidence parties can bring to these disputes is not settled. Circuit courts are split on whether "retrospective evidence"--evidence that arises after the school district drafts the individualized education program--is admissible. This Note addresses present approaches to admitting retrospective evidence, suggests parsing different categories of retrospective evidence further, and ultimately prescribes rules for admitting certain categories. Especially in light of often intensive federal court factfinding mandated by the IDEA in special education cases, questions of what evidence influence answers of what outcomes.
ACCESSION #
99023460

 

Related Articles

  • THE NINTH CIRCUIT'S REDUNDANT REMAND IN E.M. v. PAJARO UNIFIED VALLEY SCHOOL DISTRICT SENDS AN IMPORTANT MESSAGE. Dunn, Teddy // Boston College Journal of Law & Social Justice;2012 Supplement, Vol. 32 Issue 3, p11 

    On July 14, 2011, in E.M. ex rel. E.M. v. Pajaro Valley School District, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit remanded a case because the district court applied an improper standard in determining whether a clinical psychologist's report constituted "additional evidence" under the...

  • A "Rad" Case for Two School Psychologists? ZIRKEL, PERRY A. // Communique (0164775X);Jun2014, Vol. 42 Issue 8, p8 

    The article presents a case study of a court ruling against a school district in Texas, related to the provision of individualized education program (IEP) for a young child, named Z.A., under the U.S. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), in which the professional judgments of two...

  • SCHOOLS--HANDICAPPED CHILDREN: THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT RULES THAT THE 1997 AMENDMENTS TO INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES EDUCATION ACT DO NOT CATEGORICALLY BAR TUITION REIMBURSEMENT FOR UNILATERAL PRIVATE-SCHOOL PLACEMENTS. Ingold, Dennis // North Dakota Law Review;2010, Vol. 86 Issue 3, p587 

    In Forest Grove School District v. T.A., the United States Supreme Court held the 1997 Amendments to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) do not mandate that a child must have received special education or related services under the authority of a public agency to be eligible...

  • SPECIAL KIDS, SPECIAL PARENTS, SPECIAL EDUCATION. Czapanskiy, Karen Syma // University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform;Spring2014, Vol. 47 Issue 3, p733 

    Many parents are raising children whose mental, physical, cognitive, emotional, or developmental issues diminish their capacity to be educated in the same ways as other children. Over six million of these children receive special education services under mandates of the Individuals with...

  • Districts Facing Hurdles in Collecting Medicaid Refunds. M. H. // District Administration;Mar2011, Vol. 47 Issue 3, p14 

    The article looks at the process U.S. school districts go through when collecting reimbursements from the U.S. government for students who receive medical services from the federal health program Medicaid. It discusses a report completed by the National Alliance for Medicaid in Education (NAME)...

  • Six Things to Never Say or Hear During an IEP Meeting. Cheatham, Gregory A.; Hart, Juliet E.; Malian, Ida; McDonald, Joan // Teaching Exceptional Children;Jan/Feb2012, Vol. 44 Issue 3, p50 

    The article discusses strategies for successful communication and collaboration between parents of children with disabilities and educators in individualized education programs (IEPs) that are mandated by the U.S. Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The authors look at...

  • Is a Free Appropriate Public Education Really Free? How the Denial of Expert Witness Fees Will Adversely Impact Children with Autism. Reed, Leslie // San Diego Law Review;Winter2008, Vol. 45 Issue 1, p251 

    The article discusses the issue on the expert witness fees of children with autism regarding the school district's Individualized Education Program (IEP) in the U.S. Parents with low-income cannot pursue the judicial proceeding since they cannot fund an expert. Hence, they are bringing action on...

  • COOPERATIVE FEDERALISM POST-SCHAFFER: THE BURDEN OF PROOF AND PREEMPTION IN SPECIAL EDUCATION. Freed, Lara Gelbwasser // Brigham Young University Education & Law Journal;2009, Vol. 2009 Issue 1, p103 

    The article discusses a court case wherein the burden of proof was awarded to the plaintiff on the special education hearing of Schaffer v. Weast. The U.S. Supreme Court used the default rule in its decision on the challenged made on the Individualized Education Program (IEP) under the...

  • Recent Development: Forest Grove School District v. T.A. Blumberg, Emily // Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review;Winter2010, Vol. 45 Issue 1, p163 

    The article discusses the U.S. Supreme Court case Forest Grove School District v. T.A. about reimbursement for private special education services in relation to the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The court held that such reimbursement is allowed when a school district...

Share

Read the Article

Courtesy of THE LIBRARY OF VIRGINIA

Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics