Court

C.B. vs. Fair Lawn Timeline

  • L. Starts at Stepping Stones

    L.'s IEP team met and approved in December. L. begins her placement at Fair Lawn's Stepping Stones program on her 3rd birthday.
  • Fall 2007, Parents Request Alternative Placement

    L.’s parents requested an alternative placement with more interaction with typically developing peers.
  • Fair Lawn Denies Request for Alternative Placement

    Fair Lawn denies the parents request for alternative placement.
  • IEP Meeting Held at Parents' Request

    An IEP meeting was held at the parents’ request. The parents requested that L.’s placement be changed to the Children’s Center, an inclusive preschool at Montclair State University. The parents brough assessment reports they obtained at their own expense and a video of L. in an inclusive classroom. Prior to December 20, 2007 Meeting - Fair Lawn Staff met to develop a proposed IEP. The proposed IEP included continued placement at Stepping Stones without providing for interaction with non-disa
  • Fair Lawn Begins Reverse-Inclusion

    Fair Lawn begins reverse-inclusion that allowed non-disabled children to come in and play with the group.
  • L.'s Parents Enroll L. at Children's Center

    L.’s parents tranferred her to the Children’s Center and initiated administrative proceedings against Fair Lawn seeking reimbursement for expenses in placement at the Children’s Center and obtaining other services for L.
  • Due Process Hearing Begins with District Court

    The due process hearing began in the New Jersey Office of Administrative Law. On the 11th day, the Administrative Law Judge determinated that the proceedings should be bifurcated meaning that the ALJ would first decide wheather Fair Lawn’s placement of L. complied with IDEA. If it was determined that it was an appropriate placement that complied with IDEA, he would not consider reimbursement for the Children’s Center.
  • District Court Ruled in Favor of Fair View

    ALJ determined that Fair Lawn had complied with IDEA and met the LRE requirement. He found that L.’s disability “renders her incapable of being satisfactorily educated in a regular classroom, and she wouldn’t benefit from the modeling behavior of her peers if she were educated with them”.
  • U.S. Court of Appeals Upholds Decision

    U.S. Court of Appeals Upholds Decision
    June 28, 2012 - The U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit upholds the District Courts decision.