United States Fifth Circuit

A judgment finding that a Special Education Hearing Officer improperly determined that defendant-child meets the definition of "child with a disability" under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) is affirmed as the district court applied the proper standards and properly considered evidence of defendant's academic, behavioral, and social progress in determining that he does not need special education services by reason of his ADHD and, thus, is not a "child with a disability" under the IDEA.

Appellate Information

• Decided 10/04/2007
• Published 10/05/2007

Judges

• BENAVIDES, Circuit Judge:, Before KING, GARZA and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Fifth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• Jeffrey L. Rogers (argued), Amy Cumings Tucker, Feldman & Rogers, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee., Robert H. Etnyre, Jr., Royston, Rayzor, Vickery & Williams, Houston, TX, Rhoda Janet Nelson (argued), Fort Lauderdale, FL, Andreana J. Gusman, Gusman Law Firm, Spring, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.