Sch. Comm. of Burlington v. Dep't of Educ.

Sch. Comm. of Burlington v. Dep't of Educ.

Opinion

 [*361]  [***389]  [**1998]    JUSTICE REHNQUIST delivered the opinion of the Court.

] The Education of the Handicapped Act (Act), 84 Stat. 175, as amended, 20 U. S. C. § 1401 et seq., requires participating state  [****5]  and local educational agencies "to assure that handicapped children and their parents or guardians are guaranteed procedural safeguards with respect to the provision of free appropriate public education" to such handicapped children. § 1415(a). These procedures include the right of the parents to participate in the development of an "individualized education program" (IEP) for the child and to challenge in administrative and court proceedings a proposed IEP with which they disagree. §§ 1401(19), 1415(b), (d), (e). Where as in the present case review of a contested IEP takes years to run  [***390]  its course -- years critical to the child's development -- important practical questions arise concerning interim placement of the child and financial responsibility for that placement. This case requires us to address some of those questions.

Michael Panico, the son of respondent Robert Panico, was a first grader in the public school system of petitioner Town of Burlington, Mass., when he began experiencing serious difficulties in school. It later became evident that he had ] "specific learning disabilities" and thus was "handicapped" within the meaning of the Act, 20 U. S. C. § 1401(1).  [****6]  This entitled him to receive at public expense specially designed instruction to meet his unique needs, as well as related transportation. §§ 1401(16), 1401(17). The negotiations and other proceedings between the Town and the Panicos, thus far spanning more than eight years, are too involved to relate in full detail; the following are the parts relevant to the issues on which we granted certiorari.

In the spring of 1979, Michael attended the third grade of the Memorial School, a public school in Burlington, Mass., under an IEP calling for individual tutoring by a reading specialist for one hour a day and individual and group counselling. Michael's continued poor performance and the fact that  [*362]  Memorial School was not equipped to handle his needs led to much discussion between his parents and Town school officials about his difficulties and  [**1999]  his future schooling. Apparently the course of these discussions did not run smoothly; the upshot was that the Panicos and the Town agreed that Michael was generally of above average to superior intelligence, but had special educational needs calling for a placement in a school other than Memorial. They disagreed over the [****7]  source and exact nature of Michael's learning difficulties, the Town believing the source to be emotional and the parents believing it to be neurological.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.