01-3667 Todd v. Duneland School Corp.

By: dmc-admin//August 26, 2002//

Listen to this article

“[T]he case conference committee considered and rejected an extended school year, and Mrs. Todd’s contention to the contrary is without merit. Further, given the lack of regression, R.T.’s ability to progress, and our deference to the BSEA, we find no error in the defendants’ rejection of an extended school year. Finally, Mrs. Todd contends that the defendants violated the IDEA because even after the previous IEPs, R.T. was unable to read. Like her claim that the defendants did not consider an extended school year, this contention is not supported by the record. As discussed above, R.T.’s reading comprehension scores improved over the years and he even scored within the national average. Therefore, her contention that he could not read is incredible in light of the fact that R.T.’s reading comprehension scores were satisfactory.”

Affirmed.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, Lozano, J., Kanne, J.

Select Region or Brand

Upcoming Event