Second District Court action: The second appeal to the Federal District Court, District of Oregon was filed on August 9, 2016, appealing the hearing officer’s order in due process #2 that 175 hours of compensatory education must be provided prior to the student’s graduation from high school.15 Judge Ann Aiken reversed the ALJ’s order and provided an additional year for the student to access compensatory education. Wischerath filed a petition for attorney fees.16 Ninth Circuit appeal: On May 12, 2017, Wischerath appealed the district court’s dismissal of the first district court action to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.17 Before the case could be decided on the merits, the parties settled all claims. Here, wrapped up in one family and one child’s school experience, were all the legal actions available to families with children with disabilities — save an appeal to the Supreme Court. More than a decade after the first ODE complaint, the child at the heart of these legal actions is now an independent adult. The legal actions resulted in the child being awarded nearly 600 hours of additional, needed educational supports as she transitioned from high school to college. More broadly, the district was alerted that a student’s excessive absences should trigger a consideration of potential disability. While neither an ODE complaint finding and order nor a DPHR final order are precedential, districts and parents throughout Oregon may use these results in resolving similar issues.18 19 20 Now, more than six years into my legal career, I have been able to carve out a small practice in conservation easements and am still able to hike wild property, but I realize my motto has changed to simply “do good.” Helping to protect a young person with significant cognitive delays through a guardianship, helping families navigate the intricacies of education law, and helping families hold school staff and administrators accountable is a rewarding and soul-filling career. 1. IDEA is an initialism, not an acronym. Each letter is pronounced, such as in “VIP.” 2. IDEA, 20 U.S.C. §§ 1400 et seq. (2004); 34 C.F.R. § 300 et seq. (2009). 3. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. § 794 (2006); 34 C.F.R. Part 104. 4. Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq., (1990); 29 C.F.R. § Part 35 (1010). 5. ADA Amendments Act of 2008, Pub. L. No. 110-325, 122 Stat. 3553 (2008). 6. Office of Civil Rights, Questions and Answers on the ADA Amendments Act of 2008, last viewed October 8, 2023 from https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/dcl-504faq-201109.html#:~:text=Q2%3A%20What%20 is%20the%20Amendments,effective%20on%20January%201%2C%202009.&text=Congress%20passed%20the%20 Amendments%20Act,ADA%27s%20definition%20of%20a%20disability. 7. 20 U.S.C. § 1401(3). See also 20 U.S.C. § 1401(29). 8. 20 U.S.C. § 1415(i)(3). 9. In the Matter of Eugene 4J School District, Case No 13-054-035 (Feb 10, 2014). 10. In the Matter of the Eugene SD 4J, Case No. 14-054-042 (Jan. 16, 2015). 11. In the Matter of Eugene 4J School District, Case No. 15-054-047 (Mar 9, 2018). 12. The final order was issued February 19, 2016, a first amended order was issued July 13, 2017. 13. In the Matter of the Education of Student and Eugene School District, Case No. DP 15-113. 14. Sarah Grace Williams v. Eugene Sch. Dist. 4J and Lane Educ. Service Dist., 6:16-cv-00890-TC (D. Or. Mar. 10, 2017). 15. S.G.W. v. Eugene Sch. Dist., No. 6:16-cv-01612-AA (D. Or. Mar. 16, 2017). 16. S.G.W. v. Eugene Sch. Dist., No. 6:16-cv-01612-AA (D. Or. May 30, 2017). 17. Sarah Williams et al v. Eugene Sch. Dist. et al, No. 17-35411. 18. ODE Dispute Resolution, https://www.oregon.gov/ode/rules-and-policies/pages/dispute-resolution.aspx 19. ODE Complaint Log, https://www.oregon.gov/ode/rules-and-policies/Pages/complaintlog.aspx 20. ODE Due Process Log, https://www.oregon.gov/ode/rules-and-policies/Pages/dueprocesslogs.aspx 35 Trial Lawyer | Summer 2024
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy Nzc3ODM=