| |
This case involved the defendant, Stamford Board of
Education's, renewed motion for an award of attorneys' fees and
costs incurred in its defense against the plaintiffs, a seventeen
year old senior enrolled at Stamford High School and his parents,
"Mr. and Mrs. K."
The plaintiff was expelled for 90 days in May of 2007
after two altercations with a classmate earlier in the year, and
sought a declaratory and injunctive relief to prevent the defendant
from enforcing the expulsion. The plaintiff claimed that he was
entitled to the protections afforded to disabled students pursuant
to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), and Section
504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and that his constitutionally protected
due process rights were violated. However, the judge found that
the plaintiff did not meet any of the criteria of a special education
student, and, thus, was not entitled to the "stay put" protections
under the IDEA. The plaintiff had exited special education two years
prior to the altercations, and the defendant was not aware of his
past disability.
After the court granted the Stamford Board of Education's
motion for summary judgment, it filed a motion to recover attorney's
fees and costs from the plaintiffs' counsel under the Individuals
with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA), 20 U.S.C. §1415(i)(3)(B)(II)
and (III). Pursuant to the IDEIA, a court may use its discretion
to award attorneys' fees to a prevailing local educational agency
against the attorney of a parent who files a complaint that is,
or continues to litigate a claim that becomes, "frivolous, unreasonable,
or without foundation," or was "presented for any improper use."
After reviewing the record, the court found sufficient
evidence to conclude that the plaintiffs' counsel "continued to
litigate [the IDEA claim] after the litigation clearly became frivolous,
unreasonable, or without foundation." The plaintiff argued that
his claim was based on "a fair application and comprehensive presentation
of the applicable law and reasonable application of the law [to
the] facts of the case." However, the court found that the plaintiffs
continued litigation even after the injunctive relief was denied
and they were clearly on notice of the deficiencies of their IDEA
claim.
The court awarded the defendant the fees and costs
incurred in the defense of the IDEA claim alone. Expenses associated
with the defense of plaintiffs' other claims were not included in
award. The District Court ordered the Plaintiffs' counsel to pay
attorney's fees in the amount of $15,972.50, payable to the defendant
within thirty days.
Jennifer Pomales, CCA Legal Intern (5/09)
|
