Cases in Partnership with The Zimmerman Law Firm

In The Estate of Asher Orrin Michael Brown, b/n/f Amy Truong v. Cypress-Fairbanks Independent School District, Civil Action No. 4:11-cv-01491, a lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas over the suicide of a student who was persistently bullied and harassed due to his religion and sexual orientation. This case is still in litigation.

In H.L. b/n/f Rebecca Montelongo and Anthony Lopez v. Durham School Services, L.P., Cause No. 2010-1138-4, a lawsuit was filed in the McLennan County District Court over the repeated molestation of a student while riding the school bus. This case is still in litigation.

In J.D. b/n/f Luke and Mendy Degelia v. Georgetown Independent School District, Civil Action No. 1:10-cv-00717, a lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas over injuries suffered by a wheelchair-bound student on a class field trip. This case is still in litigation.

In The Estate of C.A., a Minor Child, Deceased, and Vincent and Celestina Agwuoke v. Houston Independent School District, Civil Action No. 4:10-cv-00531, a lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas over the drowning death of a student at a Houston ISD swimming pool. This case is still in litigation.

In The Estate of A.R., a Minor Child, Deceased, and Tomasa Rodriguez v. Houston Independent School District, Civil Action No. 4:10-cv-00533, a lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas over the drowning death of a deaf student with a seizure disorder at a Houston ISD swimming pool. This case is still in litigation.

In The Estate of Jon Thomas Carmichael, b/n/f Jon Timothy and Diane Carmichael v. Joshua Independent School District, Civil Action No. 3:11-cv-00622, a lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas over the suicide of a student who was regularly bullied, harassed, and assaulted at school. This case is still in litigation.

In Angel Salas and Lupe Salas v. La Vega Independent School District, Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00114, a lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas over the bullying and assault of a student because of his ethnicity. This case is still in litigation.

In The Estate of Montana Lance b/n/f Jason and Deborah Lance v. Lewisville Independent School District, Civil Action No. 4:11-cv-00032, a lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas over the suicide at school of a student who was routinely bullied and harassed.

In M.J. b/n/f Michael and Stacie Jaeger v. Marion Independent School District, Civil Action No. 5:10-cv-00978, a lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas over the persistent bullying and harassment of a student with an emotional disability. This case is still in litigation.

In J.B. b/n/f Mauricia and Joaquin Barrera v. Pharr San Juan Alamo Independent School District, Civil Action No. 7:09-cv-00178, a lawsuit filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas over the sexual assault of an autistic child. This case settled for an undisclosed amount in mediation.

In J.E. b/n/f Claudia Estrada v. San Antonio Independent School District, Civil Action No. 5:10-cv-00436, a lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas over the molestation of a physically and mentally disabled student by a school employee. This case is still in litigation.

In I.A. b/n/f Kaye Rhodebeck v. Seguin Independent School District, Civil Action No. 5:10-cv-00866, a lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas over the exclusion of a wheelchair-bound student from class activities and from a class field trip. This case is still in litigation.

In L.L. b/n/f Ronald and Tammy Lunsford v. Tarkington Independent School District, Civil Action No. 1:09-cv-00754, a lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas over the repeated bullying and harassment of a student with Asperger’s. This case settled for an undisclosed amount in mediation.

In Ruben Vique Arnold, b/n/f Sara Arnold v. Texas School for the Deaf, Civil Action No. 1:10-cv-00814, a lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas over the repeated sexual assault of a deaf and mentally retarded student. This case is still in litigation.

In C.E. b/n/f Anabel Echeverria v. United Independent School District, Civil Action No. 5:10-cv-00037, a lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas over the assault of a mentally retarded student by a school employee. This case settled for an undisclosed amount in mediation.

In Justin Elem b/n/f Rick Ejem v. Waco Center for Youth, Civil Action No. 6:10-cv-00268, a lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas over the repeated sexual assault of a student by a classmate. This case is still in litigation.

In D.J.D. b/n/f LaSonja McConnell v. Waco Independent School District, Civil Action No. 6:10-cv-00320, a lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas over injuries suffered at school by a student with multiple disabilities. This case is still in litigation.

In T.H. b/n/f Renee Holmes v. Waco Indepdendent School District, Civil Action No. 6:11-cv-00064, a lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas over injuries suffered as the result of defective playground equipment. This case is still in litigation.

In Andricka Stewart v. Waco Independent School District, Civil Action No. 6:10-cv-00311, a lawsuit was filed in McLennan County District Court, and then removed to the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, over the repeated sexual assault of a disabled student.

Other Cases

In C.C. b/n/f Mr. & Mrs. C. v. Austin Independent School District, C.C. was an emotionally disturbed young man who got in severe trouble at school, triggering an adjudication in the Juvenile Justice System. The firm represented him at all school related ARD Committee Meetings and Manifestation Hearings, as well as throughout the criminal proceedings. After a year and half C.C. is ready to re-enter the public school system. Through the efforts of this young man, his family and Mr. Cirkiel, the charges were dismissed.

In D.S. b/n/f F. and S.S. v. Austin Independent School District, David Beinke, Special Education Advocate argued that the school failed to consider Dylan’s unique educational needs by not providing him appropriate reading and writing services. The Hearing Officer agreed and Ordered the relief requested.

In S.S. b/n/f K.T v. Conroe Independent School District, the firm represented a young female child with a debilitating and rare medical condition. After her grandmother started complaining that the school was not following the requisites of the Americans With Disabilities Act, in regard to serving S.S., the school started retaliating against K.T., threatening her with arrest if she came to the campus. In addition, all of a sudden the school demanded to have their own physician evaluate S.S., even though, and due to her rare condition, only a few doctors in te United State, could even see her. K.T. refused and litigation ensued. The firm did not represent the family during the due process but did in the federal suit, arguing that the school did not have an absolute right to conduct their own evaluation, as had previously been set in 5trh Circuit caselaw. We successfully appealed the case to the 5^th Circuit, who accepted our position that the school did not have an absolute right to complete the evaluation, but at the very least, had to show the request was reasonable and necessary, a new standard in the 5^th Circuit.

In E.A. b/n/f L. and P.A. v. Conroe Independent School District, David Beinke, Special Education Advocate and Cirkiel argued that the school failed to consider Eric’s unique educational needs when developing his Individualized Educational Plan (IEP) so when the parents in frustration sent their child to a private school, deserved reimbursement. The Hearing Officer agreed and ordered CISD to reimburse the family for these outstanding costs, as well as provide other relief.

In S.P. b/n/f Mr. & Mrs. P. v. Conroe Independent School District, S., was a female student with special needs who was sexually assaulted by a school police officer. The firm, with Beinke as Advocate and Cirkiel as Co-Counsel with Michael Josephson, Esq. of the Law Firm of Fibich, Hampton & Leebron, L.L.P., in Houston, Texas brought forth claims pursuant to IDEA, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and Section 1983 of the Civil Rights Acts. This case settled during negotiation for services and other value.

In O.S. b/n/f Mr. & Mrs. S. v. Dallas Independent School District, S., was a male student with significant cognitive impairments who was sexually assaulted by a student. The firm, as Co-Counsel with J.K. Ivey, Of the Law Firm of Rosenthal, Watson, L.L.P., in Austin, Texas brought forth claims pursuant to IDEA, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and Section 1983 of the Civil Rights Acts, requesting damages. This case settled during mediation.

In A.C. b/n/f Mr. and Mrs. C. v. Dripping Springs Independent School District, A. was an emotionally disturbed young male who got in severe trouble at school, triggering a need for private residential services. The firm represented the family in their efforts to have the school provide transition services to the child upon re-entry into the community and remuneration for privately paid educational and therapeutic services. The case settled during mediation.

In J.D. b/n/f v. D.D. v. Gatesville Independent School District, the firm represented a young man with a learning disability who was incessantly harassed and bullied by other children, while at school. He and his father parents complained but the school did nothing. One day a fellow student head-butted J.D. and caused significant injury and neurological damage. Even after this injury, the school still could not keep him safe from the bullying of another student. He was injured again. We filed on his behalf a claim against the school, for violations of J.D.’s rights pursuant to the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act and Section 504, requesting damages. This case settled during mediation.

In J.K. b/n/f Mr. & Mrs K. v. Georgetown Independent School District and a companion case, B.M. b/n/f Mr. & Mrs. M. v. Georgetown Independent School District, both students were unable to attend school due to a severe allergic reaction to untreated mold in the school. As such, each were provided home-bound services and no more than a few hours per week, and eventually graduated high school, each moving on to college. Among numerous violations of IDEA, Beinke and Cirkiel argued that the school had a duty to provide a regular educational day and educational services to the young men, via a webcamera, or similar assistive technology device, as this was their "least restrictive environment." The Hearing Officer disagreed, upholding the school’s claim that the provision of educational services through a webcamera, while helpful, was not legally necessary to provide FAPE, especially in light of each student’s success academically. We disagreed and appealed the case to federal district court, where the Judge, while sympathetic to our argument, sustained the Hearing Officer decision. We hope to re-litigate this or a similar issue in the future. As a side note, the school district attempted to have this firm pay all their legal funds (over $150,000), arguing that our case was without merit. Here the Judge agreed with our position, that an attempt to change established law, is not worthy of the remedies requested by the school. Also of note is the fact the webcameras could have been installed for about $100 (if you are interested in their usage for home bound services, see this video clip http://learningismessy.com/blog/?p=196 ).

In B.M. b/n/f Mr. M. v. LaGrange Independent School District, B. was an emotionally disturbed young female who got in severe trouble at school, triggering an adjudication in the Juvenile Justice System and need for private residential services. The firm represented the family in their effort to have the school provide transition services to the child upon re-entry into the community and remuneration for privately paid educational and therapeutic services. The case settled during mediation.

In A.E. b/n/f Major J.E & Mrs E. v. Katy Independent School District and in his sister’s companion case, A.E. b/n/f Major E. & Mrs. E. v. Katy Independent School District, the children were receiving specialized services for Autism and their own emotional and educational needs, by and through the Hawaii State Educational Agency, when the Major and family was stationed there. When ordered State-side and to Texas, he was not able to find educational services commensurate with the IEP that each child had received in Hawaii, at the Katy ISD. The firm, with the incredible support of Mr. Beinke, represented this incredible family, filing a due process against both the school district and the Texas Educational Agency, for not providing or paying for such necessary services. The Hearing Officer dismissed the claim against TEA, finding he had no jurisdiction over such a claim. Fortunately the case against the school settled for a value so that the children could attend a private school, where necessary services would be provided.

In M.O. b/n/f Mr. & Mrs. O. v. Killeen Independent School District, M. was a very young female student who was sexually molested by another child. She experienced severe emotional anguish. The firm brought forth, with Michael Zimmerman, of the Law Firm of Zimmerman & Villarial, of Waco, Texas, claims pursuant to IDEA, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Section 1983 of the Civil Rights Acts and a Title IX Claim, requesting damages. This case settled during mediation.

In J.M. b/n/f Mr. & Mrs. M. v. Lake Travis Independent School District, J. was a five-year old with autism and significant behavioral issues. The parents had provided substantial private therapeutic services for the child with the hope the school would continue to provide these services, within the context of the special education programs. Notwithstanding significant private assessments recommending special education services, the school refused. With Yvonnilda Muniz as Co-Counsel, the firm brought forth a due process claim, arguing the child met the standard for admission to special education. During the case we learned that the school professionals had destroyed any material developed during the testing procedures, that would have been helpful to the parents position. In addition, we argued that the district had not followed all necessary procedures regarding "child find," and completing the child’s FIE. The Hearing Officer (amazingly) determined that the district deserved deference with there evaluation and found for the district notwithstanding their numerous procedural and substantive violations. A complaint was filed with the Texas Education Agency, pursuant to FERPA, complaining of the practice of destroying educational records. TEA referred the case to the Office Of Civil Rights. As of this writing, we are still awaiting a ruling from OSEP. Due to the school district’s intransigence, the family moved to a neighboring school district, where J. was easily entered into Special Education services and of course, has benefitted from the provision of such services. Even though we lost the case we believe our efforts had value in that the child find procedures at the school changed and the Director and Assistant Director of Special Education Services at the school were not retained.

In H.L. b/n/f Mrs. L. v. Richardson Independent School District, H., was a male student with a severe cognitive impairment. As part of his transition plan he was to go to and from school and work by public transportation. He suffered significant physical injuries and neurological damages. The firm brought forth a claim pursuant to IDEA, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and Section 1983 of the Civil Rights Acts, asking for damages. This case settled during mediation.

In D.M. b/n/f v. Mr. & Mrs. M. v. Round Rock Independent School District, the firm represented a young man with an emotional disability who was incessantly harassed and bullied by other children, while at school. His parents complained but the school did nothing. One day a few boys befriended him and tricked him into pulling the fire alarm. The parents met with school officials requesting that there son not be required to return to the school, and with the same other boys, where the incident occurred. They disagreed and the very next day, the same boys befriended D. again and tricked him into starting a small fire on a couch. He was detained in a juvenile facility and then later required significant residential treatment care. In the civil administrative proceeding, the parent filed a due process claim against the school, for violations of D.’s rights pursuant to the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act and for reimbursement of significant out-of-pocket expenses. This case settled during mediation.

In G.B. b/n/f Mr. & Mrs. B. v. Sacred Heart Catholic School, we represented a young man who had a significant propensity to an immunity issue. His physician determined that if G. received any immunizations it would likely trigger, in him, a negative response, triggering major auto-immune issues. Because he could not be immunized, the religious school discharged him from the program. With the support of the family, the firm learned that the school received financial benefit from the United States Department of Agriculture and thus was required to follow the requisites of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. After filing a complaint with the Office of Civil Rights, the religious relented in their position and offered re-admission to the school.

In T.S. b/n/f Mr. & Mrs. S. v. Seguin Independent School District, T. was a very young male student with Autism who was physically and emotionally abused by his special education teacher. He experienced significant regression and severe mental anguish. The firm, with Mike Kinser as primary Advocate, brought forth claims pursuant to IDEA and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, requesting damages. This case settled during mediation.

In R.L. b/n/f R L., Sr. v. The Texas Youth Commission, David Beinke, Director of Special Education Services and Advocate argued to the Texas Youth Commission that the school failed to provide an Individual Educational Evaluation. The Hearing Officer agreed and Ordered the relief requested.