Court issues opinion and order in special education funding case; Upholds right of children with disabilities to bring suit

United States District Judge Michael Watson has upheld the right of students with disabilities to bring suit against the state of Ohio, the Governor and the Ohio Department of Education to enforce the plaintiffs' rights to adequate funding of special education services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. The plaintiff children and their families in Doe v. State of Ohio are represented by attorneys from the Ohio Legal Rights Service (LRS).

"For more than 20 years, over 250,000 students with disabilities have waited each year for the State to provide adequate funding to support their needs. At last the case can move forward toward a remedy for the State's violation of the federal rights of these students," said LRS Trial Attorney Susan Tobin.

The opinion recognizes that the plaintiffs and the plaintiff class they represent have stated a cause of action under both federal laws. The case will now proceed to discovery and trial. Read the Judge's Opinion and Order: Doe v. State of Ohio - Memorandum Opinion and Order (PDF file)

Case Background

In 1994, the Doe plaintiffs were granted leave to intervene in the Thompson lawsuit that was originally filed by Ohio school districts. In 1995, the original school district plaintiffs agreed to be dismissed from the case, leaving only students with disabilities as the plaintiffs.

This case seeks to enforce state officials' obligations to ensure that children with disabilities receive a free appropriate public education (FAPE) under the IDEA. Plaintiffs allege that inequities in and underfunding of special education results in discrimination and denial of the appropriate education of Ohio students with disabilities.

In 2009, a partial settlement was reached to resolve other claims in the case. The Consent Order brought Ohio into line with federal regulations regarding the Ohio Department of Education's monitoring of school district special education programs and investigation of complaints filed by parents or students. The Consent Order included a number of procedural safeguards resulting in transparent processes, increased input from parents and more timely and comprehensive complaint decisions.

For more information about Doe: Doe v. State of Ohio

To view and print PDF documents, you need to have Adobe® Reader®, a free software program, installed on your computer. Download Adobe® Reader®

Keywords: