| Home | Services | Workshops | In Print | Attorneys | Contact Us | FAQ | Links |

 

The articles provided here are for your information and use in publications. Copyrights cited for each apply.

Each reprint must include the author's name and contact information for the Law Offices of Herbert D. Hinkle, Esq.

 

Return to the list of online articles

 

Online Articles

Special Education & Residential Services

by
Herbert D. Hinkle, Esq.

Herbert D. Hinkle Law Office
2651 Main Street
Lawrenceville, New Jersey 08648
(609) 896-4200 or (215) 860-2100

Under certain circumstances, local school districts can be responsible for the cost of a residential placement. A case recently litigated by this office illustrates this point. J.M. v. Stroudsburg Area School District, involved a 13 year old pupil with an attention deficit disorder, later diagnosed as a pervasive developmental disorder. For several years leading up to seventh grade, J.M.'s behavior deteriorated at home, and to a lesser degree, in school, along with his ability to organize his work and attend to task. Social skills also deteriorated.

Eventually, the family concluded that in order to learn the skills necessary to succeed in school and eventually in adult life, J.M. required a residential school. When the district failed to make a placement, the family unilaterally placed J.M. at Devereux GlenHolme in Connecticut. While at Devereux GlenHolme, J.M. made significant progress in all domains.

Following a hearing and review by the Special Education Appeals Panel, the Commonwealth Court held that J.M. required residential services in order to receive an appropriate education. In ordering the District to reimburse the family for the cost of placement, the Court rejected the District's argument that it could not be ordered to place J.M. out-of-state in a non-approved school. According to the Court, when the District failed to provide J.M. with an appropriate education, it became responsible to reimburse the family for the services it provided to J.M. once it was proven those services were necessary. The Court also ordered the District to provide J.M. with an additional year of services as compensatory education.

The Court based its ruling on the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Therefore, the decision is relevant in not only Pennsylvania but in all states.

 

Copyright 1998 H.D. Hinkle. All rights reserved.

Mr. Hinkle maintains a multi-state law practice with offices in Lawrenceville, Florham Park, and Marlton, NJ, and Yardley, Pa. Mr. Hinkle and his colleagues Ira Fingles, and Paul Prior lecture and write frequently on topics of law, aging, and disability, and are available to speak to groups in New Jersey and Pennsylvania at no charge. Call (609) 896-4200.

 

| Home | Services | Workshops | In Print | Attorneys | Contact Us | FAQ | Links |