Best Best & Krieger News Feed

Best Best & Krieger Wins Case for School District

23 Jul 2009 00:00:00 -0800

Attorney Jack B. Clarke, Jr. Wins On All Claims

July 23, 2009

An administrative law judge ruled in favor of Moreno Valley Unified School District in a special education case handled by Jack B. Clarke, Jr. of Best Best & Krieger.

In a due process request filed by the student last December, a student accused the district of failing to provide him a free appropriate public education, known as FAPE, for his special education needs. The district filed its own due process request a month later.

The district alleged that its individual education plan issued on Nov. 13 had provided a FAPE. The district further claimed that it should be allowed to conduct its own medical assessment of the student, over the parents’ objection, if the parents wanted the district to provide special education and related services to the student.

After a 14-day hearing that spanned over three months, the judge issued her decision on July 14, ruling entirely in favor of Clarke's arguments. She denied all of the student’s claims for relief, and said the district may obtain a medical assessment of the student.

Attorney Jack B. Clarke, Jr. Leads School Case to Victory

02 Jun 2009 00:00:00 -0800

Federal Judge Sides With School District In Records Dispute

The Press-Enterprise
June 2, 2009

    RIVERSIDE - A federal judge on Monday handed the Jurupa Unified School District a victory in its battle with one of its board members -- dismissing a lawsuit filed by trustee Noreen Considine that challenged the district's handling of confidential student records.
    In his ruling, U.S. District Judge George H. King said he had no jurisdiction in the matter because the federal law Considine sued under -- the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act -- did not give individuals the right to sue over the handling of student records.
    But King added that even if he did have jurisdiction, he would decline to intrude "on what is, in essence, a policy disagreement between duly elected Board Members of the Jurupa School District."
    He granted the motion without leave to amend, meaning Considine's attorney cannot retool the lawsuit and file it again.
    "It's rather striking," school district legal counsel Jack B. Clarke Jr. said of the judge's language.
    "It really shows that the judge did not believe the case had merit," he said.

Click here to read the entire story.

PERB Board Limits Jurisdiction for Breach of Contract

11 Dec 2006 00:00:00 -0800

BB&K Partner Woody Merrill defends school district’s right to alter health benefit terms in Teachers Association collective bargaining agreement

A three-member panel of the Public Employee Relations Board (Board) recently decided in favor of El Centro Elementary School District (District) in the matter of El Centro Elementary Teachers Association v. El Centro Elementary School District. Best Best & Krieger (BB&K) Partner, William “Woody” Merrill successfully defended the District before the Board.

The El Centro Elementary Teachers Association (Association) claimed that the District, by altering health benefit contributions for retired leaders in the collective bargaining agreement, had violated the Education Employment Relations Act (EERA). Merrill, on behalf of the District, argued that because health benefits for retirees are a permissive subject rather than a mandatory subject of negotiations, a unilateral alteration of the term could not constitute an unfair labor practice.

The Board noted that the jurisdiction of PERB is limited only to those violations that are unfair practices, and rejected the Association’s argument to extend PERB’s jurisdiction to include permissive subjects of negotiation included in collective bargaining agreements. The Board found in favor of the District, concluding that, while a violation of a permissive term may constitute a breach of contract, it does not also constitute an unfair labor practice. The decision clears the District of any liability for an unfair labor practice.

“This decision is significant to schools and public agencies because it is important to avoid multiple forums and multiple remedies for the same claim,” says Merrill.

Case Win: Reversal of Special Ed. Decision for Riverside USD

01 Jan 1900 00:00:00 -0800

BB&K's School Law Practice Group successfully reversed a Special Education Hearing Officer's decision before the U.S. District Court, Central District of California on August 27, 2003.

The Hearing Officer's decision stated that RUSD had failed to identify a student as eligible for special education services and that the parents of the child should be reimbursed the cost of special education services they independently provided. In a cross-complaint, the parents also sought reimbursement for attorneys fees. The Court denied that request.

BB&K Attorney Successfully Represents School District in Due Process Hearing

01 Jan 1900 00:00:00 -0800

Steven Lake, an Of Counsel in the firm's San Diego office, prevailed in a Due Process hearing on behalf of Capistrano Unified School District. The June 29, 2007 decision in Capistrano Unified School District, No. N2006120443, allows CUSD to implement the Student's IEP without his Parents' consent. The Administrative Law Judge agreed that CUSD appropriately assessed the eighth-grader with a Specific Learning Disability (in Mathematics processing) in all areas of suspected disability. Though his Parents believed the Student had behavioral and attention issues, the ALJ found he had superior cognitive abilities, strong written and oral language skills, and an age-appropriate attention span. Nor did he have sensory processing problems or occupational therapy needs. The ALJ heard evidence from CUSD's credible and persuasive witnesses that the Student was sociable, had friends, behaved typically for an eighth-grade boy, and did not have any significant behavior problems. In addition, CUSD offered an IEP designed to meet Student’s unique needs and offered appropriate goals and objectives.. Moreover, there was no evidence the Student needed additional services beyond what CUSD offered in its IEP.