Skip to main content
Special Education Law
DECISIONDismissedSEL No. 2014-ih-1300

New York City Department of Education, Impartial Hearing Decision

NYSED redacts decisions, and its source files vary in quality. Gaps and text errors are original to the NYSED documents.

FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION

Case Number:

Student’s Name:

Date of Birth:

District:

Hearing Requested By: Parent

Date of Hearing: September 10, 2014

Actual Record Closed Date: September 10, 2014

Hearing Officer: , Esq.

NAMES AND TITLES OF PERSONS WHO APPEARED SEPTEMBER 10, 2014

Parent of Student — Parents

District and New York City Department of Education Representative — DOE

The Matter (hereinafter referred to as “Student”), came before me for determination, in accordance with the provisions of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. §1412 et seq. on September 10, 2014. The undersigned had been appointed by the New York City Department of Education’s Impartial Hearing Office as the Impartial Hearing Officer authorized to preside over this matter, after the recusal by one or more Impartial Hearing Officers, by notice dated June 24, 2014.

The proceeding was initiated by correspondence filed by Parent dated June 18, 2014 and received by the New York City Department of Education’s Impartial Hearing Office on June 20, 2013. The Due Process Complaint (I.H.O. Exhibit I) requested that Student by provided , as Student was but entering . Parent expressed the belief that Student would have a better if such services were provided.

In light of the recusal of the previously-appointed Impartial Hearing Officer and the urgency of the request, a hearing was immediately scheduled for July 10, 2014. However, the District, within its rights, raised objection to the scheduling of any hearing prior to the expiration of the Resolution Process. Further delay occurred when required personnel were unavailable due to summer recess. The hearing was finally conducted on September 10, 2014

At the hearing held on September 10, 2014, the parties were advised that, as the summer of 2014 had passed, Parent’s request for summer services had been rendered moot. The parties were permitted to discuss between themselves Parent’s concerns, as well as new developments in the Student’s evaluations. District was afforded the opportunity to permit Parent to raise issues not specified in her Due Process Complaint. However, the District Representative noted that the concerns raised by Parent that were not specified in her Due Process Complaint should properly be addressed the District’s Committee on Special Education and declined to permit issues not raised in that Complaint to be heard. Rather, the District Representative assured Parent that the Committee would reconvene to address Parent’s concerns.

As stated by the Office of State Review, the controversy between the parties must be real and live (Application of a Child with a Disability, Appeal No. 11-104). As the summer of 2014 has passed, no meaningful relief can be afforded Parent in this proceeding.

ORDER

Based upon the above review, it is

HEREBY ORDERED that Parent’s Due Process Complaint be, and the same hereby is, DISMISSED. Dated: September 12, 2014

James P. Walsh, Esq. gc

JAMES P. WALSH, ESQ.

Impartial Hearing Officer JPW:gc

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE

Within 35 days of the date of this decision, the parent and/or the New York City Department of Education has a right to appeal the decision to the State Review Officer of the New York State Education Department under Section 4404 of the Education Law and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.

“The notice of intention to seek review shall be served upon the school district not less than 10 days before service of a copy of the petition for review upon such school district, and within 25 days from the date of the decision sought to be reviewed. The petition for review shall be served upon the school district within 35 days from the date of the decision sought to be reviewed. If the decision has been served by mail upon petitioner, the date of mailing and the four days subsequent thereto shall be excluded in computing the 25- or 35-day period.”

(8NYCRR279.2[b]) Failure to file the notice of intention to seek review is a waiver of the right to appeal this decision.

Directions and sample forms for filing an appeal are included with this decision. Directions and forms can also be found in the Office of State Review website: www.sro.nysed.gov/appeals.htm.

DOCUMENTATION ENTERED INTO RECORD SEPTEMBER 10, 2014

I. Parent’s Due Process Complaint Notice, I.H.O. dated 6-18-14 with attached letter by, dated 6-19-14 (3 pages; Parents)