STATE OF CONNECTICUT
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Student v. Fairfield Board of Education - CT SDE Case No. 19-0406
Case No. 19-0406
Student v. Fairfield Board of Education
Appearing on behalf of the Parent: Phillip Cohn, Esq. Goldman, Gruder & Woods, LLC 200 Connecticut Avenue Norwalk, CT 06854
Appearing on behalf of the Board: Peter Maher, Esq. Shipman & Goodwin, LLP One Constitution Plaza Hartford, CT 06103-1919
Appearing before: Patrick L. Kennedy, Esq. Hearing Officer
ISSUES:
1. Did the District commit procedural violations of FAPE concerning the 2017-18 school year and 2018 ESY?
2. Did the District fail to offer a program which provided substantive FAPE for the 2017-18 school year and 2018 ESY?
3. Did the District commit procedural violations of FAPE concerning the 2018-19 school year?
4. Did the District fail to offer a program which provided substantive FAPE for the 2018-19 school year?
5. If the District has failed to provide FAPE for the relevant period, is Pacific Quest an appropriate program for the Student?
6. If so, should the District be ordered to reimburse the Parents for tuition and other expenses for the Student’s attendance at Pacific Quest?
7. If the District has failed to provide FAPE for the relevant period, is Chrysalis an appropriate program for the Student?
8. If so, should the District be ordered to reimburse the Parents for tuition and other expenses for the Student’s attendance at Chrysalis?
9. If violations of FAPE have been found, should other remedies, including compensatory education and reimbursement of other related expenses, be ordered?
SUMMARY AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY:
Case 19-0406 was commenced by the Parents by request received by the Board on March 5, 2019. A prehearing conference was scheduled for March 18, 2019 but subsequently cancelled at the request of the parties based on the representation that they had reached an agreement in principle. From information provided by the Board by electronic mail, it was determined that the decision date was May 17, 2019, which date was subsequently extended to June 17, 2019.
On May 14, 2019, the undersigned hearing officer was advised by the attorney for the Parents that the parties had reached a settlement in the case and the matter should therefore be dismissed with prejudice.
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER:
The matter is dismissed with prejudice.