Legal Update for Special Education Law – Case Law Update

Marshall Dennehey
Contact

Marshall Dennehey

Court Allows Supplementation of Record in Special Education Appeal, Weighing Child Find Obligations.
Q.H. by and through Regan H. v. Scranton School Dist., 2025 WL 419529 (M.D. Pa. Feb. 6, 2025)

This case centers on whether the school district failed in its Child Find duty by delaying the student’s special education evaluation despite repeated parental requests. While the hearing officer found no violation, citing the student’s absenteeism, the court has allowed additional testimony from the school psychologist to assess whether earlier identification was warranted. This testimony is crucial in determining whether the student was denied a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE).

The parent claimed that, despite requesting her daughter be evaluated for special education needs on multiple occasions since her kindergarten year, she was not evaluated until her second grade year, when she was deemed eligible for special education services. 

After two days of testimony in June 2024, the hearing officer determined that the school district did not violate its Child Find obligation because the student’s frequent absenteeism would have rendered it impossible to identify her educational needs any earlier than it did. Notably, the hearing officer did not hear testimony from the school psychologist who had evaluated the student, instead basing the determination on the student’s evaluation report and testimony from her parent and second-grade teacher.

The court granted the parent ‘s request to supplement the administrative record with testimony from the school psychologist regarding whether her evaluation of the student suggested that the student should have been identified as having special education needs sooner. In so holding, the court recognized its obligation to give due weight to the factual findings of the Office of Dispute Resolution. Nevertheless, it determined that relevant, non-cumulative evidence should be considered by district courts where necessary to determine if a child has been provided with a FAPE. 

[View source.]

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations. Attorney Advertising.

© Marshall Dennehey

Written by:

Marshall Dennehey
Contact
more
less

PUBLISH YOUR CONTENT ON JD SUPRA NOW

  • Increased visibility
  • Actionable analytics
  • Ongoing guidance

Marshall Dennehey on:

Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
- hide
- hide