Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
KEVIN G., a Minor, by Jo-Ann and ROBERT G., his parents and next friends, Plaintiffs, Appellants, v. CRANSTON SCHOOL COMMITTEE and Kathleen F. DeLuca in her Official Capacity as Treasurer for the City of Cranston, Defendants, Appellees.
Kevin G. is an eleven year-old boy who suffers from several medical conditions, including respiratory problems requiring use of a tracheal tube for breathing. He appeals the decision by the Cranston school district, upheld by the district court, to place him in the Gladstone school rather than his neighborhood school, the Waterman school. We affirm.
Kevin G.'s medical conditions require that he receive medical care at school, including a full-time nurse. Gladstone is the only elementary school in the Cranston school district with a full-time nurse. Kevin G. acknowledges this, but argues that the school district has the responsibility to move a nurse teacher to Waterman. In a thorough opinion, the district court explained that while the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“the Act”), 20 U.S.C. §§ 1411-1415, requires the school district to provide a free appropriate education for children with disabilities, it does not require optimal results. See Kevin G. by Jo-Ann G. v. Cranston School Committee, 965 F.Supp. 261 (D.R.I.1997). Thus, while it may be preferable for Kevin G. to attend a school located minutes from his home, placement in Gladstone satisfies the Act. Gladstone, which is located only three miles from Kevin G.'s home, meets all his educational and medical requirements. The school district has an obligation to provide a school placement which includes a nurse on duty full-time, but it is not required to change the district's placement of nurses when, as in this case, care is readily available at another easily accessible school.
Accordingly, we agree with the district court that the Gladstone placement satisfies the requirements of the Act.
Affirmed.
PER CURIAM.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 97-1785.
Decided: November 17, 1997
Court: United States Court of Appeals,First Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)