STATE OF CONNECTICUT
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Student v. Stamford Board of Education - CT SDE Case No. 12-0295
Case No. 12-0295
Student v. Stamford Board of Education
Appearing on behalf of Student: Attorney Lawrence Berliner Law Office of Lawrence Berliner LLC 1720 Post Road East, Ste. 214E Westport, CT 06880
Appearing on behalf of Board: Attorney Christopher Tracey Shipman & Goodwin, LLP 300 Atlantic Street Stamford, CT 06901-3522
Appearing Before: Attorney Robert Skelley, Hearing Officer
ISSUES:
1. If the Stamford Public Schools denied a free and appropriate public education (“FAPE”) to the student for the academic year 2011-2012;
2. What is the proper primary disability that should be identified for the student;
3. Did the Stamford Public Schools fail to comply with IDEA 2004 procedural requirements and thus deny the student FAPE;
4. Are the parents entitled to reimbursement for the placement costs resulting from their unilateral decision to place the student at the Grove School;
5. Should the student be awarded compensatory services for the alleged denial of FAPE?
PROCEDURAL HISTORY:
This matter is before the Hearing Officer pursuant to a Request for Due Process hearing, filed by the student and received by the Board on February 15, 2012. A pre-hearing conference was held on February 27, 2012, in which counsel for both parties attended and the issues were identified and agreed upon, An initial Due Process Hearing date was set for March 28, 2012. A resolution meeting was subsequently held by the parties. An agreement was reached at the resolution meeting, with a short period of time elapsing as the parties formalized the agreement in writing. On Wednesday, March 21, 2012, counsel for the student advised the Hearing Officer via email that the parties had reached agreement and formalized that agreement. Counsel for the student also stated that he was withdrawing the Parent’s request for a Due Process Hearing in this matter, with prejudice, in accordance with the terms of that agreement.
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER:
a; There being no current request for a Due Process Hearing in this matter, and with the consent of the parties involved, this matter is dismissed with prejudice.