Lausd v. Michael Garcia

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedJanuary 28, 2014
Docket10-55879
StatusPublished

This text of Lausd v. Michael Garcia (Lausd v. Michael Garcia) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Lausd v. Michael Garcia, (9th Cir. 2014).

Opinion

FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL No. 10-55879 DISTRICT, Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:09-cv-09289- v. VBF-CT

MICHAEL GARCIA, Defendant-Appellee. OPINION

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Valerie Baker Fairbank, District Judge, Presiding

Argued December 9, 2011 Submitted January 28, 2014 Pasadena, California

Filed January 28, 2014

Before: Alex Kozinski,* Chief Judge, and Barry G. Silverman and Kim McLane Wardlaw, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam Opinion

* On January 9, 2014, Chief Judge Kozinski was drawn to replace the late Judge B. Fletcher. 2 LAUSD V. GARCIA

SUMMARY**

Education Law

Affirming the district court’s judgment, the panel held, pursuant to the Supreme Court of California’s answer to a certified question, that when a student between the ages of 18 and 22 who is eligible for special education services in California is incarcerated in a county jail, the cost of the student’s education is borne by the school district where the student’s parent resides.

COUNSEL

Barrett K. Green (argued) and Daniel L. Gonzalez, Littler Mendelson, P.C., Los Angeles, California, for Plaintiff- Appellant.

Paula D. Pearlman, Shawna L. Parks (argued), and Andrea F. Oxman, Disability Rights Legal Center, Los Angeles, California; Linda Dakin–Grimm, Daniel M. Perry, and Delilah Vinzon, Milbank Tweed Hadley & McCloy, LLP, Los Angeles, California, for Defendant-Appellee.

** This summary constitutes no part of the opinion of the court. It has been prepared by court staff for the convenience of the reader. LAUSD V. GARCIA 3

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

When a student between the ages of 18 and 22 who is eligible for special education services in California is incarcerated in a county jail, who pays the cost of those services? The school district of the student’s parent’s residence? The county in which the jail is located? The State of California? To find out, we certified a question of California law—specifically, the interpretation of California Education Code section 56041—to the Supreme Court of California. L.A. Unified Sch. Dist. v. Garcia, 669 F.3d 956 (9th Cir. 2012).

On December 12, 2013, the California Supreme Court gave its answer: The cost of the student’s education is borne by the school district where the student’s parent resides. L.A. Unified Sch. Dist. v. Garcia, 58 Cal. 4th 175, — P.3d —, 2013 WL 6501267 (2013). The facts of the case are detailed in our order certifying the question to the California Supreme Court, 669 F.3d at 958–59, and in the California Supreme Court’s opinion, which is attached as an appendix to this opinion. The district court had affirmed a 2009 decision of the California Office of Administrative Hearings that the Los Angeles Unified School District was responsible for providing special education services to Michael Garcia. Because the district court’s ruling is consistent with California Supreme Court’s answer to the certified question, its judgment is AFFIRMED. 4 LAUSD V. GARCIA

APPENDIX LAUSD V. GARCIA 5 Case: 10-55879 12/17/2013 ID: 8911992 DktEntry: 63 Page: 1 of 29

IFwEE.(:gPEL cF; O i'c R lF2lE J.f!R'0HPtA: S 09 F E . N. r FA E S , C O PY 212tt P 32 13E 1 K :8 I THE SUPREM E COURT OPAA N 'E ND M mz Eco ou af Lro z l D21:21 E 0 3 LOSANGELESUNII S FED CHOOL Fa k .Mc i Cll rn A Guœ e DITRI S CT, PlitfadAp eln, anif n p l t a D pk eu 5 9 69 19 3 9hCi. .05 89 t rNo 1-5 7 MI CHAELGARCI A, Deedn adRepo dn. fn at n s n et

I Caionaa idvd awi adsblywh ibt e 1 a d2 n l ri,n n iiu l t iait o s ewen 8 n 2 f h i y aso aeadh sn t e ere arg lr ihsh o dpo ietldt er f g n a o yt an d eua hg co l ilma s nie o t cniu t rcieseil d ct nadrltdsrie,vnwhlicreae otn eo eev p ca euai n eae evcsee i nacrtd o e iacutji s ln a cr ipeeuse hv be stfe.(dCoe n onyal o og s etn rrqiis ae en aiid E . d, , a t s j500sb .b;e j.j 500506sb.c()a1naee sauoy 64,u d()se#, j 60,6 2,ud() ;lu lbld tttr 4 rfrne aet teE uainCoe Lieh ohrttshteev eeecs r oh dct d. k te tesae tarcie o ) sbtnile ea fn sfrseil dct nadrltdsrie, lo as u sat fdrlud o p ca euai n eae evcsCai mi' a o f p lce adpo eue g vrigseil d cto po rmsmut o fr t oiis n rcd rs o enn p ca eu ain rga scnom o terq ie nso tefdrln iiulwi Diaiie Ed cto Ac h eurmet fh e ealdvd as t sblis u ain t h t (eefrDE ,n tefdrleuain tai lmetn cai i hrat I A)adh eearg l oshtmpe n ad lrf t e t ys poios (0U.. j10 esq;4C.. j 30103016(03.Bu rvs n.2 SC. 4 0 te.3 FR.j 0.0-0 .7 2 1) t i ) Cogesh slfit ec saet dtr n whc p bi etywi i tesae nrs a etto ah tt o eemie ih u l ni t n h tt c t h irso sbefr rkdn seild cto adrltdsrie t iseiil s ep nil o po iig p ca euain n eae evcs o t l be g ppl icuigtoeicreae icutji ui,nldn hs nacrtdn ony al s . 6 LAUSD V. GARCIA Case: 10-55879 12/17/2013 ID: 8911992 DktEntry: 63 Page: 2 of 29

,.y'' g) E ;7 i.,u. 7'.-17 * , a 6O efh-. -su iClo ispcldctnce eht . ' t51 p t p n a ra s i eu i s m t %; pt - j s i n ' e a ao h a j: . r p jj r . f d sg.ae teetys:.œil frpo iigaseild cto po rm i eintsh ni . p be o rvdn p cae u ain rga s t g . ,-. 4;) .,y . f )n. r y; scims#,qWe rneteeusote ntdSaeCutf pelfr et - 4 '.' atdh rqetfh U i t s oroApa o o j 1?,g . e t s teNit Cicit as rteflo n q eto o Caionalw, s h nh ruto nwe h olwig u sin f l ri a a f rfr ltdb ti cut Do sCaionaEdct nCo escin50 , ih eomuae y hs o r: e lfri uai d eto 6 41whc o po ie g nrlyta frq aiyn p plbt e teae o 1 a d2 yas rvd s eeal hto ulfig u is ewen h gs f 8 n 2 er, tesh o dsrc whr t p pls rn rsd sirs nil fr rvdn h co l itit eehe u i'paeteie s epo sbe o po iig seild cto a drltdsrie,fi rso sblyfr rviigs ca p ca eu ain n eae evcsafx ep niii o po dn pçil t euaint aqai igidvdawh iicreae iacutji ( l dct o ulyn niiul osnacrtdn ony al Ca. o f ? R ls f pr,ue8589() ue o C utrl .4 ( 5. ) Weas rh t u sint s'As s lepan ato g scin nwe ta q eto ç . we halx li,l u h eto Ye ' h 50 1de ntyi tr seicl ades onyaln tstes ttr 64 os ob t emspcsal drscutjiimae,h tuoy s y a ln u g ibo deo g t ec mp s seild ct npo rmsfreiil a g ae s ra n u h o no as p ca euai rga o lgbe o cutjiimae bt e te gs f1 ad2 yasadn ohrttt onyaln ts ewenh ae o 8 n 2 er,n o tesaue epiiyasg srso sblyfrh po iino seild cto t sc x l t sin ep n iit o te rvso f pca euain o uh cl i idvd as Ap ligtetr o scin5 0 t asg rs niit i ti n iiu l. pyn h ems feto 641o sin epo sbly n hs i stn icnitn wi tep moe o tesa ea dteseil d ct n et g s o sset t h u ss fh tmt n h pca eu ai i h o sh mea awh l,n d e ntcet asr o u wokbersl . ce s oea d o s o rae bud r n ral eut s FAC ALA PROC D LBAC UND TU ND E URA KGRO Mih eGacawa b r i Jn 19 .Himoh r a rsddi teCi cal ri s on n u e 9 0 s te h s eie n h t y o Beli Lo An ee Co ny fo b fr Gacas it u t tepeeti . f l n s g ls u t,rm eoe ri'brh ni h rsn tme , l Gacafrtbcmeeiil frseil dtainsrie i tescn gae ri is ea lgbe o p ca et t evcsn h eo d rd, co whnh wa ietida hvn seii lann d fce ce a welssec e e sdnie s aig p cfc erig eiin is s la p eh f adln u g i ar n.HiS itito rsdn e'teLo An ee Unfe n a g ae mp i t sç src feiec, h s g ls iid me d ' Sh oDirc( A. ie)poie tepcaeuainporm ihs al col sitL. Uns d,rvddh seildct rga n ier t o y yas (e j.20 U inShoDitit.mi (t Ci 19) 5F.d11, er. Se 4 0; no col srcvS t 9h r 94 1 3 59 8 h . 12 ,n 1E ecmp loyeuainrsdnyrlfr hlrnae 6truh 55f. t o usr dct eiec ue o ci e gs hog h o d 2 LAUSD V. GARCIA 7 Case: 10-55879 12/17/2013 ID: 8911992 DktEntry: 63 Page: 3 of 29

1 as dtr n stelcl dcto aa ec rso sbefr rvdn aseil 8 lo eemie h oa euainl gny ep nil o po iig pca euainporml WhnGacawa 1 yasodh lfL.. ie ad dct rga .

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Los Angeles Unified School District v. Garcia
669 F.3d 956 (Ninth Circuit, 2012)
Los Angeles Unified School District v. Garcia
314 P.3d 767 (California Supreme Court, 2013)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Lausd v. Michael Garcia, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lausd-v-michael-garcia-ca9-2014.