Reviewing Transporting Students with Disabilities Case Law in 2013
WRITTEN BY PEGGY A. BURNS, ESQ.
The cases capsulized below represent the most significant issues generating controversy and legal intervention in the area of pupil transportation in 2013.
T
STN's legal contributor shares insights and lessons learned for student transporters of students with disabilities on the most relevant court cases that occurred last year.
TRAGIC FLORIDA CASE MOVES FORWARD
Herrera v. Hillsborough County School Board
and Hillsborough County School District (June 18). Te suit claimed that I.H., who was confined to a wheelchair, was improperly positioned on the vehicle, leading to an obstructed airway, from which she died. Te parents claimed that the bus attendant noticed that I.H. was unable to breathe, but took none of the actions that would have been indicated and appropriate. Neither the bus attendant nor the driver, allegedly, attempted to resuscitate the girl, or call 911. In addition, the district had specific knowledge of this student’s difficulty in holding her head upright, and her most recent IEP recognized the need for proper positioning. Te death of I.H. led to parents’ alleging that
the school district had already demonstrated in numerous incidents it had “a reckless disregard for the well-being and safety of exceptional student education (ESE) students while under [its] care and supervision.” More specifically, parents alleged facts that demonstrate the numerous incidents and complaints about the transportation staff ’s failure to properly handle disabled students put the district on notice that its transportation staff needed additional or different training. Tis alleged failure to train could qualify as a municipal policy of deliberate indifference suffi-
his annual compilation of the year’s important legal develop- ments focuses on transportation of students with special needs.
cient to support a cause of action under federal law against the district. Te U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida allowed the case to move forward.
STUDENT’S SUICIDE ALLEGEDLY PROMPTED, IN PART, BY MEAN SCHOOL BUS GAME
Moore v. Chilton Co. Bd. of Educ., (Alabama,
March 27). A. M. was a student with a growth disorder that made her appear bow-legged and an eating disorder that was connected to her being overweight. “Her physical attributes made her a ‘tar- get for a wide variety of bullies at school’.” Among the cruel practices to which her peers subjected her were “pig races” on the school bus, described in the lawsuit as “a school-bus game in which a high school senior male grabs an ‘ugly,’ ‘fat’ girl and kisses her on the cheek, in front of jeering students.” A. M. complained to teachers and other school officials but was allegedly punished by school personnel for having a “bad attitude” and being slow to get to class. Plaintiffs alleged that numerous school administrators witnessed the bullying and that A. M. reported many of the incidents, but no school official took steps to stop it. Rather, A.M. penned a suicide note and took her own life. Te plaintiffs alleged that the school board had “actual notice and knowledge” of pervasive bullying events, and the “school bus driver joined other students in taking ‘perverse delight’ in watching the ‘pig races,’ of which A.M. was a target.” Te court allowed allegations that the school
board acted with deliberate indifference to peer-on- peer harassment to move forward for determination as to whether the district’s conduct amounted to actual discrimination against the girl on the basis of her disabilities.
www.stnonline.com 41
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84