Austintown Local School Dist. Bd. of Edn. v. Mahoning Cty. Bd. of Mental Retardation & Dev. Disabilities, 92-144
| Decision Date | 16 June 1993 |
| Docket Number | No. 92-144,92-144 |
| Citation | 613 N.E.2d 167,66 Ohio St.3d 355 |
| Parties | , 82 Ed. Law Rep. 1170 BOARD OF EDUCATION OF AUSTINTOWN LOCAL SCHOOL DISTRICT et al., Appellees, v. MAHONING COUNTY BOARD OF MENTAL RETARDATION AND DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES, Appellee; Ohio Department of Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities et al., Appellants. |
| Court | Ohio Supreme Court |
SYLLABUS BY THE COURT
1. When, pursuant to R.C. 3323.04 and an individualized education program, a local school district proposes to place a handicapped child in a program operated pursuant to R.C. 3323.09 by a county board of mental retardation and developmental disabilities, the county board may not simply refuse to accept the child. The county board of mental retardation and developmental disabilities must resolve any objections to the placement through the procedure contained in R.C. 3323.04.
2. In the absence of an individualized education program requiring that educational services be provided in a particular developmental center, the Ohio Department of Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities is not obligated by R.C. 3323.091 to establish and maintain educational programs for students with disabilities residing in the center.
At the times relevant to this appeal, the intervenors-appellees, Dacia Kieger, William Russell Jones, Nena Edwards, and Jennifer Jones ("intervenors"), were school-age handicapped children residing at the Youngstown Developmental Center ("YDC"). YDC is a residential institution for the care and custody of mentally retarded adults and children. It is operated by appellant, Ohio Department of Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities ("Ohio Department"), and is located within the Austintown Local School District. The Austintown school district is located in Mahoning County.
Appellee, the Board of Education of the Austintown Local School District ("Austintown Board"), is charged by statute with the administration and management of the Austintown Local School District. See R.C. 3313.47. 1 The Austintown Board is responsible, under state and federal law, for providing a free, appropriate public education to all handicapped students of school age residing within the Austintown Local School District. See R.C. 3323.07; Section 1400 et seq., Title 20, U.S.Code.
Prior to being placed in the YDC, the four handicapped children resided at the Gruter Foundation, a group home located in Wayne County. When the Gruter Foundation was closed, these children were transferred to YDC by the Ohio Department pursuant to a consent order obtained by Ohio Legal Rights Service ("OLRS").
The school-age residents of YDC received their educational services in community-based programs at facilities not located at YDC, such as the Leonard Kirtz School. The Leonard Kirtz School is operated by appellee, the Mahoning County Board of Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities ("Mahoning County Board"). It offers an environment that is less restrictive than an educational unit on the grounds of YDC.
In August and September 1987, conferences between school officials, education professionals, and parents were held in an effort to develop individualized education programs ("IEPs") for Dacia Kieger and William Russell Jones for the 1987-1988 school year. The purpose of an IEP is to identify and develop services which meet the unique educational needs of the person to whom it applies. The development of an IEP is mandated by the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act, Section 1400 et seq., Title 20, U.S.Code. The IEP teams determined that the appropriate educational placement for Kieger and Jones would be at the Leonard Kirtz School.
The Austintown School Superintendent, Bernard L. Dunnan, wrote to Dr. Douglas Burkhardt, the Superintendent of the Mahoning County Board, on August 31, 1987, formally requesting "at least on a temporary basis, that these children be enrolled in the Leonard Kirtz School for the 1987-88 school year * * *."
Dunnan followed up his letter with a telephone call on September 2, 1987. At that time, Burkhardt indicated that Kieger and Jones would not be accepted for enrollment in the Leonard Kirtz School. Burkhardt rejected the request because "[t]he amount of funding available for Mahoning County resident students is diminished by the admission of non-resident students to the Leonard Kirtz School."
The Austintown Board filed the present action in the Mahoning County Court of Common Pleas on September 4, 1987, seeking relief from both the Mahoning County Board and the Ohio Department. The Austintown Board sought a temporary restraining order, preliminary and permanent injunctions, and declaratory judgment requiring the Mahoning County Board to accept Kieger and Jones into the Leonard Kirtz School for the 1987-1988 school year. The Austintown Board further sought a declaratory judgment that the Ohio Department was obligated under R.C. 3323.091 to establish and maintain educational programs for the school-age residents of YDC and preliminary and permanent injunctions compelling the Ohio Department to establish and maintain such programs.
The court of common pleas issued a temporary restraining order directing the Mahoning County Board to admit William Russell Jones and Dacia Kieger to the Leonard Kirtz School and scheduled a hearing on the preliminary injunction for September 17, 1987.
Two days prior to the preliminary injunction hearing, IEP conferences were held regarding the remaining two intervenors, Jennifer Jones and Nena Edwards. As had been the case with the IEP conferences regarding William Russell Jones and Dacia Kieger, all of the conferees, with the sole exception of Mahoning County Board Superintendent Burkhardt, concurred that the most appropriate educational placement would be the Leonard Kirtz School. Among concurring conferees were the parents of each of the students, representatives of OLRS, representatives of YDC, the Principal of the Leonard Kirtz School, and the Director of Pupil Personnel/Curriculum Services of the Mahoning County Board of Education.
Because the Mahoning County Board refused to accept them into the Leonard Kirtz School, the Austintown Board filed an amended complaint seeking the same relief for Jennifer Jones and Nena Edwards as it had sought for William Russell Jones and Dacia Kieger. The amended complaint added as party-defendants the Director of the Ohio Department and the Superintendent of YDC.
On the day of the hearing on the preliminary injunction, the parents of William Russell Jones and Dacia Kieger filed a motion on behalf of the children to intervene, which was granted by the court. In their complaint, the intervenors sought an order compelling the Mahoning County Board to educate the children at the Leonard Kirtz School. In a cross-claim against the Austintown Board, the intervenors sought an order compelling the Austintown Board "to immediately establish and provide the FAPE [Free Appropriate Public Education] to Intervenors in compliance with their current educational placements as defined by their current IEPs during the pendency of this action and until new IEPs have been fully agreed upon and implemented."
At the preliminary injunction hearing which followed, all parties agreed that Dacia Kieger, William Russell Jones, Jennifer Jones, and Nena Edwards would be placed in the Leonard Kirtz School during the pendency of the action. The court of common pleas incorporated the parties' agreement into an entry that it journalized on September 21, 1987.
The Ohio Department and its Director, and YDC and its Superintendent ("state defendants") filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint. The Mahoning County Board filed its answer to the amended complaint, in which it disputed the validity of the placements and asserted as an affirmative defense that because the legal residence of the students was outside Mahoning County, the county had no authority to provide them with special education. 2 The intervenors filed an amended complaint adding the claims of Jennifer Jones and Nena Edwards. No responses to that complaint were filed. In September 1988, each of the parties submitted motions for summary judgment.
In January 1990, after denying the state defendants' motion to dismiss, the court of common pleas ruled on the motions for summary judgment. The court granted the motion of the state defendants. It further granted the motions of the Austintown Board of Education and intervenors insofar as they argued that the Mahoning County Board was obligated to accept the four students into the Leonard Kirtz School. It denied the Mahoning County Board's motion in total. The trial court held that the children, for the purpose of school attendance, were residents of the Austintown school district and, therefore, once the IEPs determined that the Leonard Kirtz School was the proper placement for the children, the Mahoning County Board was required to accept them pursuant to R.C. 3323.04.
The Seventh District Court of Appeals reversed. In essence, the appellate court concluded that (1) funding of the education for intervenors was an issue in the case; (2) pursuant to R.C. Chapters 3313 and 3323, the school district where the parents of the children reside is generally responsible for funding the children's education; (3) however, in this case, the Ohio Department is responsible for funding the special education of intervenors because it did not notify the Austintown Board prior to transferring intervenors from the Gruter Foundation facility to YDC; and (4) the Ohio Department can fund the intervenors' education either by proving a program at YDC pursuant to R.C. 3323.091 or through payment to the Mahoning County Board for placement at the Leonard Kirtz School. The court of appeals remanded the cause to the trial court for further proceedings.
The cause is now before this court pursuant to the allowance of a motion to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Stancourt v. Worthington City School Dist.
...Education Act ("IDEA"), Section 1400 et seq., Title 20, U.S.Code. In Austintown Local School Dist. Bd. of Edn. v. Mahoning Cty. Bd. of Mental Retardation & Dev. Disabilities (1993), 66 Ohio St.3d 355, 613 N.E.2d 167, the Supreme Court of Ohio described the IDEA as The Individuals with Disab......
-
Dougall v. Copley-Fairlawn City Sch. Dist. Bd. of Educ.
...opted to receive IDEA funds. See Gibson, 655 Fed. Appx. at 426 (citing Bd. of Educ. of Austintown Local Sch. Dist. v. Mahoning Cty. Bd. of Mental Retardation & Developmental Disabilities, 613 N.E.2d 167, 172 (Ohio 1993)). Under the IDEA, states must establish policies and procedures to ensu......
-
Gibson v. Forest Hills Local Sch. Dist. Bd. of Educ., Case No. 14-3575
...every state in this circuit, Ohio has opted to receive IDEA funds. Bd. of Educ. of Austintown Local Sch. Dist. v. Mahoning Cty. Bd. of Mental Retardation & Developmental Disabilities, 613 N.E.2d 167, 172 (Ohio 1993). The lynchpin of the IDEA is a document known as the "individualized educat......
-
Waddell v. LTV Steel Co., Inc.
...for the first time in a motion for summary judgment."); cf. Austintown Local School Dist. Bd. of Edn. v. Mahoning Cty. Bd. of Mental Retardation & Dev. Disabilities (1993), 66 Ohio St.3d 355, 365, 613 N.E.2d 167, 175-176 (since issue not raised in motion for summary judgment, issue not trie......