Taking Off the Gloves
2000 - In The Matter of Arons, 32 IDELR 253. Delaware had threatened me with the unauthorized practice of law from 1994 on. But as the stakes increased and districts continued to lose, the attorney representing Brandywine filed a letter with the Office of Disciplinary Counsel, alleging unauthorized practice of law. In what can only be characterized as a kangaroo court, Delaware refused to allow nonlawyer representation. Of interest is that my work was found to be without blemish, but Delaware could not assure that those less skilled would provide adequate representation. David Vladeck represented PIC and me in this matter, appealing the State’s negative decision to the U.S. Supreme Court. That application was denied, my second strike at bat.
Delaware Decision (3.6MB PDF)
2000 - Barnegat Township Board of Education, EDS 2813-98. Mr. and Mrs. Rick Tallman sued New Jersey and Barnegat school district for knowingly putting their son in a noneducational placement that murdered him within 24 hours of entry. I did the remand to OAL from the federal court for the fact finding trial related to a determination of damages.
2001 - J.S. and M.S. v. Ramapo Cent. Sch. Dist., 35 IDELR 185, 165 F. Supp. 2d. The parent was a prevailing party in her dispute with the school district. Between that settlement and her filing for my fees, the Buckhannon decision was issued. This did not allow prevailing party payment when a settlement had not been put on the record. The Ramapo case was the first to apply Buckhannon to an application for fees in a special education case.
2001 - The U.S. Office of Special Education Programs funded a study entitled The Involvement of Lay Advocates in Due Process, by Eileen M. Ahearn, Ph. D. . The study is fundamentally about me as a result of the Delaware decision. I was never contacted or involved in any way with the research, though my library is definitive on this subject.
The
Involvement of Lay Advocates in Due Process (2.6MB PDF)
2002-2004 - I participated in lobbying efforts to include nonlawyer language in the
reauthorized version of IDEA as a parent option to lawyers when due process was
needed. House Bill, 1350, included that language. The Senate version did not. The
explanation given by then Senator Jon Corzine’s office was that the pressure of trial
lawyers, COPAA and P&A entities prevented the House language from being
incorporated into the final version.
2003 - Murphy v. Arlington Cent. Sch. Dist. Bd. of Educ. I represented the
Murphy family for 5 years in three separate hearings for their son. Their case
solidified the Connors decision in that New York was now required to fund
nonapproved placements prospectively as a result of stay-put during the pendency of
a litigation. The parents filed for my fees as an expert consultant and won that
request on a limited basis.
Murphy v. Arlington Cent. Sch. Dist. Bd. of Educ. (3.2MB PDF)
2004 - Arons v. State of New York, 41 IDELR 92. As the result of two separate
hearing decisions, on two separate cases, and the improper actions of attorneys from
funded protection and advocacy entities who subsequently represented those parents,
I sued the State of New York, the attorneys and the families. This decision held that
this was not an IDEA case but a contract case.
2004-2005 - A three-year grant from the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special
Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) was given to COPAA, Council of
Parent Attorneys and Advocates, and the University of Southern California
University Center for Excellence in Developmental Disabilities. Its purpose was to
train parents to assist other parents and avoid charges of the unauthorized practice of
law. When learning of the grant I asked why I was not contacted in that I was
specifically referenced throughout its application. The OSERS representative said that
she did not know who I was and could not understand why I would be interested in
this work.
COPAA letter to Marilyn Arons (516K PDF)