PHILADELPHIA – A federal appellate court has ruled that the Pottstown School District and various school district officials were properly dismissed from an action brought by a parent who claimed her disabled child was denied a proper education.
Per a Jan. 15 per curiam opinion from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit and judges Kent A. Jordan, Paul B. Matey and Richard L. Nygaard, the trio affirmed the result found in the trial court.
Plaintiff Shanicqua S. Aponte had appealed after the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania had granted judgment on the administrative record, in favor of the Pottstown School District, Ryan Oxenford, Matthew Moyer, Steven Rodriguez, Brett Wade, Kim Stillwell, Eren Jacobs and Joseph Schroeder.
“Aponte, in her twice-amended complaint, brought claims under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), which requires institutions that receive federal education funding to provide all children with disabilities a free and appropriate public education (FAPE),” the appellate court said.
“She alleged that the district failed to provide her child with a FAPE, and that the District retaliated against her in violation of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. Aponte also named as defendants several employees of the district, and Brett Wade, the principal of a private school that contracted with the district to briefly provide the Student with educational services.”
At first, the District Court granted the defendants’ motions to dismiss, in part, and dismissed all claims and defendants, with the exception of Aponte’s IDEA claims and Section 504 claims against the district. The District Court later granted judgment on the administrative record in favor of the district, leading Aponte to appeal in a timely fashion.
“The District Court did not err in granting judgment on the administrative record in favor of the district. Here, Aponte’s arguments amount to nothing more than challenges to the hearing officer’s credibility determinations and assertions that various testifying witnesses lied during the hearing,” the Third Circuit said.
“Aponte did not offer any relevant non-testimonial, extrinsic evidence that would warrant a departure from the Hearing Officer’s factual findings. For these reasons, the District Court properly granted judgment on the administrative record with regard to Aponte’s IDEA claim. For these reasons, the District Court properly granted judgment on the administrative record with regard to Aponte’s IDEA claim.”
The Third Circuit added that the District Court also did not err in granting judgment on the administrative record in favor of the district, on Aponte’s Section 504 retaliation claim.
Aponte alleged that calls to the Office of Children and Youth (OCY) in October 2016 and October 2017 for suspected child abuse and neglect were retaliation for her advocating for a FAPE for the student, and further alleged that the Hearing Officer’s findings to the contrary should be overturned.
“With regard to the October 2016 call, Aponte asserts that one of the relevant witnesses at the hearing lied about a related matter. However, as grounds for that assertion, Aponte submitted to the District Court an email chain which does not demonstrate that the witness in question lied. Furthermore, the District Court found credible the testimony of the key witness, who actually called OCY, and Aponte has not meaningfully challenged this finding,” the Third Circuit said.
“Accordingly, as the District Court concluded, the record does not indicate that the October 2016 call to OCY was retaliatory in nature. Similarly, with regard to the October 2017 call to OCY, the District Court found credible the testimony of witnesses who described the student’s behavior that led to the call that day, and Aponte failed to meaningfully challenge that conclusion to establish that the call was placed as retaliation, rather than in response to the events of the day.”
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit case 20-1471
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania case 2:18-cv-03199
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com