.

Legal Updates for Special Education Law

Legal Update for Special Education Law – Results*

Presented by the School Leaders’ Liability Practice Group

April 1, 2024

Christopher Conrad (Harrisburg, PA) successfully defended a local school district in a special education matter that involved a high school student identified with a specific learning disability and ADHD. The student sought out a peer during the school day, went into the peer’s classroom and physically attacked her, punching and kicking her several times. The attack lasted for several minutes. The dean of students intervened to protect the peer being attacked, and the dean was struck several times as well. After the incident, the student was suspended out of school, pending an informal disciplinary hearing and a determination by the student’s IEP team as to whether her conduct was a manifestation of her disabilities. The IEP team determined the conduct was not a manifestation of the student’s disabilities and, therefore, concluded she could be disciplined as any other student would be under the circumstances, including expulsion from school. 

The student and her parent disagreed with this determination and requested an expedited due process hearing. At the hearing, the parent argued that her daughter’s conduct was a result of trauma she experienced from a previous fight she had with her peer, and that her daughter’s decision to fight her peer was on impulse and attributable to her ADHD condition. 

We presented testimony from the dean of students, who testified that she had talked to the student earlier in the school day. During that conversation, the student expressed to the dean that she wanted to fight her peer to “squash the beef” they had between them. The dean cautioned the student not to engage her peer; that there would be adverse consequences if the student started a fight. With this, we argued the student’s behavior was not impulsive, and her decision to attack her peer was premediated and thought out. The hearing officer agreed and found the school district was correct in concluding the student’s conduct was not a manifestation of her disabilities. The hearing officer permitted the school district to seek further discipline of the student, including expulsion.

*Prior Results Do Not Guarantee a Similar Outcome 

Legal Update for Special Education Law – April 2024 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent legal developments of interest to our readers. This publication is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship. We would be pleased to provide such legal assistance as you require on these and other subjects when called upon. ATTORNEY ADVERTISING pursuant to New York RPC 7.1 Copyright © 2024 Marshall Dennehey, all rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reprinted without the express written permission of our firm. For reprints or inquiries, or if you wish to be removed from this mailing list, contact tamontemuro@mdwcg.com.

Firm Highlights

Thought Leadership

New Jersey Appellate Division Affirms Recreational Immunity for County Under Landowners' Liability Act

In a recent unpublished decision in Matthew Kuzma, etc. v. Middlesex County Parks Department, et al., the New Jersey Appellate Division affirmed summary judgment in favor of Middlesex County Parks Department, holding that the county was immune from liability under New Jersey's Landowners' Liability Act (LLA), notwithstanding its failure to plead the immunity as an affirmative defense in its answer to the Complaint. The case arose from injuries sustained by fourteen-year-old plaintiff, Matthew Kuzma, while playing basketball at Spring Lake Park in South Plainfield on August 23, 2019. The plaintiff observed a crack in the basketball court before beginning to play but did not consider it dangerous. During the game, his foot became caught in the crack, causing him to fall and suffer a significant ankle injury. The plaintiff alleged that the injury resulted in ongoing physical limitations and deprived him of the opportunity to play collegiate basketball. The plaintiff filed suit alleging that the defendants negligently maintained the basketball court. Although the county did not assert LLA immunity as an affirmative defense in its answers, it later moved for summary judgment on that basis. The plaintiff opposed the motion, arguing that the county had waived the defense by failing to plead it. The county maintained that the plaintiff had received sufficient notice of its intent to rely on the LLA through discovery and therefore suffered no unfair surprise or prejudice. The trial court agreed and granted summary judgment, concluding that the county should be permitted to invoke statutory immunity notwithstanding its failure to formally plead the defense. Relying heavily on the New Jersey Supreme Court's guidance in Arias v. Cnty. of Bergen, holding a county park was subject to the immunity of the LLA, the Appellate Division affirmed, holding that the county's failure to plead LLA immunity did not preclude reliance on the defense under the circumstances presented. The court determined that the plaintiff had received adequate notice of the immunity claim through discovery and that permitting the defense furthered the public-policy objectives embodied in the LLA. In affirming dismissal, the Appellate Division acknowledged the seriousness of the plaintiff's injury and the general societal interest in maintaining parks and recreational facilities in a safe condition. However, the court emphasized that both the legislature and the New Jersey Supreme Court have expressed a clear policy choice to limit liability for public and private landowners who make recreational property available for public use. The decision reinforces the courts' continuing adherence to the Landowners' Liability Act and the principle that recreational lands and facilities should be broadly protected from liability exposure, even in cases involving significant personal injuries.

business meeting photo

Result

Summary Judgment Obtained in Insurance Coverage Case

Thought Leadership

State Of Insurance: Q3 Notes From Pennsylvania

Pennsylvania courts issued several noteworthy insurance coverage decisions in Q3 2026, offering guidance on public policy defenses, commercial umbrella coverage, and privilege disputes in bad faith litigation. Todd's article reviews three key cases and their implications for insurers, policyholders, and coverage counsel, highlighting the continued importance of precise policy language, disciplined claims handling, and thorough documentation.

Bret E. Dubbert Joins Marshall Dennehey’s Orlando Office as Special Counsel in the Casualty Department

News

Bret E. Dubbert Joins Marshall Dennehey’s Orlando Office as Special Counsel in the Casualty Department

Defense Victory Obtained in Workers’ Compensation Case

Result

Defense Victory Obtained in Workers’ Compensation Case

Thought Leadership

Documentation as a Defense: Protecting Against Legal Malpractice Claims

Legal malpractice claims often arise years after the events in question, when memories have faded and key details may be difficult to recall. In those moments, thorough documentation and well-maintained files can become an attorney’s strongest defense. Read Megan's article on the PLUS Blog: Documentation as a Defense: Protecting Against Legal Malpractice Claims - PLUS

Event

CLM 2026 Focus Conference

Allison joins three insurance industry leaders to discuss how cyber coverage disputes, the growing impact of social inflation on bodily injury claim valuation, and the use of artificial intelligence are reshaping the bad faith landscape. The panel will examine emerging sources of extra-contractual exposure, including evolving cyber insurance coverage issues and the challenges of accurately valuing bodily injury claims. Practical approaches to claim evaluation using AI, along with defense strategies designed to help prevent or successfully defend against bad faith litigation, will also be addressed. 

Complete Victory Obtained in a Workers’ Compensation Matter

Result

Complete Victory Obtained in a Workers’ Compensation Matter

Marshall Dennehey Named a Standout in Litigation by BTI Consulting Group

News

Marshall Dennehey Named a Standout in Litigation by BTI Consulting Group

Marshall Dennehey Shareholders Recognized as Florida Trend Legal Elite Notable Women Leaders in Law

News

Marshall Dennehey Shareholders Recognized as Florida Trend Legal Elite Notable Women Leaders in Law