Attorney Berliner is following the Governor’s guidelines for the COVID 19 Outbreak. To protect your safety, Attorney Berliner is not working in the physical office space of Westport or Guilford. However, please be assured that our office is “open” virtually to manage and address all clients’ and potential clients’ concerns regarding all special education law and advocacy matters. Please call our office with a detailed message at: 203-255-0582 or e-mail: and we will return your call or e-mail promptly to set up a phone conversation or a video conference. To address the “New Normal” and ongoing issues, we are pleased to conduct Zoom webinars with the Stamford JCC entitled, Empowering Parents: The Challenging Time of Covid -19 Health Emergency and Navigating the Road Ahead. For more information and to register, please visit our Facebook page, Stay safe and healthy!

Supreme Court Declines to Hear IDEA Case

-A +A
The Supreme Court has refused to hear an appeal by a California School district which asserted that it could be exposed to claims of educational malpractice for failing to identify a student with a suspected disability. The case, Compton Unified School District v. Addison, involved a claim that the local school district violated the IDEA's Child Find provision when it falied to identify a student with a suspected disability. The parents requested a Due Process hearing and won at the administrative level. The lower federal courts affirmed that administrative decision and the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear the school district's appeal. Attorney Berliner handled a similar matter in a State Department of Education Due Process hearing. The case was entitled Student v. Regional No. 9 Board of Education, Case No. 07-094 (8/23/07); and the Hearing Offficer found that the local school district had sufficient information to complete a determination of the student's eligibility and it violated the Child Find provisions and state refulations when it failed to do so. That decision was subsequently affirmed by the federal court in Connecticut. Regional School District No. 9 v. Mr. and Mrs. M., 53 IDELR 8, 2009 WL 2514064 (D. Conn. 2009)

read full story: