University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name Beth V. v. Carroll ED-PA-0001
Docket / Court 2:93-cv-04418 ( E.D. Pa. )
State/Territory Pennsylvania
Case Type(s) Disability Rights-Pub. Accom.
Education
Case Summary
On August 16, 1993, several children with disabilities, by and through their parents, filed this class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and the Individuals with Disabilities ... read more >
On August 16, 1993, several children with disabilities, by and through their parents, filed this class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act ("IDEA"). The Plaintiffs, represented by the Education Law Center and private counsel, sought declaratory and injunctive relief, claiming that the Pennsylvania Department of Education Division of Compliance ("DOC") failed to maintain a timely complaint resolution system as required by IDEA. Specifically, the plaintiffs claimed that the DOC failed to resolve complaints within the 60 day time limit, failed to monitor and enforce corrective orders, and failed to properly address all allegations made in various complaints.

On February 14, 1995, the Court (Judge Anita Blumstein Brody) granted summary judgment for the DOC, holding that there was no private right of action under IDEA or § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and that there was no indirect right of action under § 1983. Beth V. v. Carroll, 876 F.Supp. 1415 (E.D. Pa. 1995). On June 25, 1996, however, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals (Judge Dolores Korman Sloviter) reversed the district court's ruling, noting that the Plaintiffs alleged system-wide failure, which may in certain cases waive the requirement that the plaintiffs exhaust administrative remedies before filing suit. Since the district court dismissed the case before exploring this option, the Third Circuit remanded the case for further consideration. Beth V. v. Carroll, 87 F.3d 80 (3rd Cir. 1996).

On November 12, 1996, the District Court granted class certification, however for for reasons not apparent, the case was put in "civil suspense" on February 28, 1997.

On August 12, 1998, the plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed the case. We have no firther information about this case.

Joshua Arocho - 07/30/2012


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Defendant-type
Elementary/Secondary School
Disability
disability, unspecified
General
Classification / placement
Funding
Individualized planning
Record-keeping
Records Disclosure
Special education
Staff (number, training, qualifications, wages)
Medical/Mental Health
Intellectual/Developmental Disability
Plaintiff Type
Private Plaintiff
Type of Facility
Government-run
Causes of Action Section 504 (Rehabilitation Act), 29 U.S.C. § 701
Indv. w/ Disab. Educ. Act (IDEA), Educ. of All Handcpd. Children Act , 20 U.S.C. § 1400
42 U.S.C. § 1983
Defendant(s) Department of Education
Secretary of Education
U.S. Secretary of Education
Plaintiff Description Pennsylvania children, parents, and representatives who had used, or would use, complaint resolution procedures required under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.
Indexed Lawyer Organizations None on record
Class action status sought Yes
Class action status granted Yes
Prevailing Party Defendant
Public Int. Lawyer Yes
Nature of Relief None
Source of Relief None
Form of Settlement None on record
Order Duration 1993 - 1998
Case Closing Year 1998
Case Ongoing No
Additional Resources
click to show/hide detail
Case Studies Courts and Kids: Pursuing Educational Equity Through the State Courts
By: Michael Rebell (Columbia University, and Campaign for Educational Equity)
Citation: (University of Chicago Press, 2009)
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

Docket(s)
2:93−cv−04418 (E.D. Pa.) 11/30/1998
ED-PA-0001-9000 PDF | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
Amplified Opinion Pursuant to Third Circuit Rule 3.1 (rev'd by 3rd Cir. 6/25/96) 02/14/1995 (876 F.Supp. 1415) (E.D. Pa.)
ED-PA-0001-0002 PDF | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Document Source: Google Scholar
Opinion of the Court 06/25/1996 (87 F.3d 80)
ED-PA-0001-0001 PDF | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Document Source: Google Scholar
Judges Brody, Anita Blumstein (E.D. Pa.)
ED-PA-0001-0002 | ED-PA-0001-9000
Sloviter, Dolores Korman (Third Circuit)
ED-PA-0001-0001
Monitors/Masters Putnam, Alfred W. Jr. (Pennsylvania)
ED-PA-0001-9000
Plaintiff's Lawyers Fieo, Alyssa R. (Pennsylvania)
ED-PA-0001-9000
Scanlon, Mary Gay (Pennsylvania)
ED-PA-0001-9000
Stotland, Janet F. (Pennsylvania)
ED-PA-0001-9000
Defendant's Lawyers Edney, Marsha S. (District of Columbia)
ED-PA-0001-9000
Tesoro, Claudia M (Pennsylvania)
ED-PA-0001-9000
Other Lawyers None on record

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -