Pennsylvania Ass'n for Retarded Children v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

334 F. Supp. 1257, 1971 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11312
CourtDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
DecidedOctober 8, 1971
DocketCiv. A. 71-42
StatusPublished
Cited by50 cases

This text of 334 F. Supp. 1257 (Pennsylvania Ass'n for Retarded Children v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Pennsylvania Ass'n for Retarded Children v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 334 F. Supp. 1257, 1971 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11312 (E.D. Pa. 1971).

Opinion

ORDER, INJUNCTION and CONSENT AGREEMENT

PER CURIAM.

And now, this 7th day of October, 1971, the parties having consented through their counsel to certain findings and conclusions and to the relief to be provided to the named plaintiffs and to the members of their class, the provisions of the Consent Agreement between the *1258 parties set out below are hereby approved and adopted and it is hereby so ordered.

And for the reasons set out below it is ordered that defendants the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, the Secretary of the Department of Education, the State Board of Education, the Secretary of the Department of Public Welfare, the named defendant school districts and intermediate units and each of the School Districts and Intermediate Units in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, their officers, employees, agents and successors be and they hereby are enjoined as follows:

(a) from applying Section 1304 of the Public School Code of 1949, 24 Purd. Stat. Sec. 13-13^4, so as to postpone or in any way to deny to any mentally retarded child access to a free public program of education and training;

(b) from applying Section 1326 or Section 1330(2) of the School Code of 1949, 24 Purd.Stat. Secs. 13-1326, 13-1330(2) so as to postpone, to terminate or in any way to deny to any mentally retarded child access to a free public program of education and training;

(c) from applying Section 1371(1) of the School Code of 1949, 24 Purd.Stat. Sec. 13-1371(1) so as to deny to any mentally retarded child access to a free public program of education and training;

(d) from applying Section 1376 of the School Code of 1949, 24 Purd.Stat. Sec. 13-1376, so as to deny tuition or tuition and maintenance to any mentally retarded person except on the same terms as may be applied to other exceptional children, including brain damaged children generally;

(e) from denying homebound instruction under Section 1372(3) of the School Code of 1949, 24 Purd.Stat. Sec. 13-1372 (3) to any mentally retarded child merely because no physical disability accompanies the retardation or because retardation is not a short-term disability.

(f) from applying Section 1375 of the School Code of 1949, 24 Purd.Stat. Sec. 13-1375, so as to deny to any mentally retarded child access to a free public program of education and training;

(g) to immediately re-evaluate the named plaintiffs, and to accord to each of them, as soon as possible but in no event later than October 13, 1971, access to a free public program of education and training appropriate to his learning capacities;

(h) to provide, as soon as possible but in no event later than September 1, 1972, to every retarded person between the ages of six and twenty-one years as of the date of this Order and thereafter, access to a free public program of education and training appropriate to his learning capacities;

(i) to provide, as soon as possible but in no event later than September 1, 1972, wherever defendants provide a preschool program of education and training for children aged less than six years of age, access to a free public program of education and training appropriate to his learning capacities to every mentally retarded child of the same age.

The above Orders are entered as interim Orders only and without prejudice, pending notice, as described in Paragraph 3 below, to the class of plaintiffs and to the class of defendants determined in Paragraphs 1 and 2 below.

Any member of the classes so notified who may wish to be heard before permanent Orders are entered shall enter his appearance and file a written statement of objections with the Clerk of this Court on or before October 20, 1971. Any objections so entered will be heard by the Court at 10 o’clock on October 22, 1971.

CONSENT AGREEMENT

The Complaint in this action having been filed on January 7, 1971, alleging the unconstitutionality of certain Pennsylvania statutes and practices under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and certain pendent claims; a three-judge court having been constituted, after motion, *1259 briefing and argument thereon, on May 26, 1971; an Order and Stipulation having been entered on June 18, 1971, requiring notice and a due process hearing before the educational assignment of any retarded child may be changed; and evidence having been received at preliminary hearing on August 12, 1971;

Now, therefore, this 7th of October 1971, the parties being desirous of effecting an amicable settlement of this action, the parties by their counsel agree, subject to the approval and Order of this Court, as follows:

I.

1. This action may and hereby shall be maintained by plaintiffs as a class action on behalf of all mentally retarded persons, residents of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, who have been, are being, or may be denied access to a free public program of education and training while they are, or were, less than twenty-one years of age.

It is- expressly understood, subject to the provisions of Paragraph 44 below, that the immediate relief hereinafter provided shall be provided to those persons less than twenty-one years of age as of the date of the Order of the Court herein.

2. This action may and hereby shall be maintained against defendant school districts and intermediate units as a class action against all of the School Districts and Intermediate Units of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.

3. Pursuant to Rule 23, Fed.R.Civ.P., notice of the extent of the Consent Agreement and the proposed Order approving this Consent Agreement, in the form set out in Appendix A, shall be given as follows:

(a) to the class of defendants, by the Secretary of Education, by mailing immediately a copy of this proposed Order and Consent Agreement to the Superintendent and the Director of Special Education of each School District and Intermediate Unit in the Commonwealth o,f Pennsylvania;

(b) to the class of plaintiffs, (i) by the Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Children, by immediately mailing a copy of this proposed Order and Consent Agreement to each of its Chapters in fifty-four counties of Pennsylvania; (ii) by the Department of Justice, by causing an advertisement in the form set out in Appendix A, to be placed in one newspaper of general circulation in each County in the Commonwealth; and (iii) by delivery of a joint press release of the parties to the television and radio stations, newspapers, and wire services in the Commonwealth.

II.

4.

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

Related

Schaffer Ex Rel. Schaffer v. Weast
546 U.S. 49 (Supreme Court, 2005)
Hill Ex Rel. Hill v. School Board for Pinellas County
954 F. Supp. 251 (M.D. Florida, 1997)
Susquenita Sch Dist v. S.
Third Circuit, 1996
Kozak v. Hampton Township School District
655 A.2d 641 (Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, 1995)
Hayes v. Commission on State Mandates
11 Cal. App. 4th 1564 (California Court of Appeal, 1992)
Heldman ex rel. T.H. v. Sobol
962 F.2d 148 (Second Circuit, 1992)
Heldman v. Sobol
962 F.2d 148 (Second Circuit, 1992)
Honig v. Doe
484 U.S. 305 (Supreme Court, 1988)
JG v. Bd. of Educ. of Rochester City Sch. Dist.
648 F. Supp. 1452 (W.D. New York, 1986)
David D. v. Dartmouth School Committee
775 F.2d 411 (First Circuit, 1985)
David H. v. Spring Branch Independent School District
569 F. Supp. 1324 (S.D. Texas, 1983)
Darlene L. v. Illinois State Board of Education
568 F. Supp. 1340 (N.D. Illinois, 1983)
Jose P. v. Ambach
557 F. Supp. 1230 (E.D. New York, 1983)
New York State Ass'n for Retarded Children, Inc. v. Carey
551 F. Supp. 1165 (E.D. New York, 1982)
William S. v. Gill
536 F. Supp. 505 (N.D. Illinois, 1982)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
334 F. Supp. 1257, 1971 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11312, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pennsylvania-assn-for-retarded-children-v-commonwealth-of-pennsylvania-paed-1971.