T.B., et al. v. St. Joseph School District, No. 11-2168 (8th Cir. 2012)
Annotate this CaseT.B.'s parents, on behalf of their autistic child, appealed the district court's finding that the school district did not violate the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), 20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq., by failing to provide a free appropriate public education (FAPE) to T.B., making the parents ineligible for reimbursement for the costs of T.B.'s home-based program. Given the parents' decision to ultimately settle the issue of the adequacy of the proposed individualized education program (IEP), the court questioned whether they could claim, much less successfully show, that the school district failed to provide a FAPE to T.B. Nonetheless, based on the record, the court could not say that T.B.'s home-based program was "reasonably calculated to enable [him] to receive educational benefits." The program was therefore not "proper" within the meaning of the IDEA and the parents were not entitled to reimbursement for the costs associated with it. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment.
Court Description: Civil Case - Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. District court's determination that school district had no ongoing obligation to develop annual Individualized Education Program once the parents unilaterally withdrew child from school and did not violate the IDEA by failing to offer a FAPE after child was removed from the school is affirmed. Denial of reimbursement of home-based program is also affirmed because parents cannot show the home-based program was proper under the IDEA, as the home-based program was not reasonably calculated to enable child to receive educational benefits.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.