P.F. v. Taylor

Dist. Ct. did not err in granting defendants-state officials’ motion for summary judgment in plaintiffs-special education students’ action under Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), alleging that defendants’ open-enrollment program that, among other things, allowed special education students to transfer to non-resident school districts only if non-resident school district had services or space necessary to meet student’s special needs, was discriminatory to said students’ disabilities. While record showed that nonresident school districts denied plaintiffs‘ requests to transfer based on claim that they lacked services or space to accommodate plaintiff‘s special needs, record also showed that program had similar space and service considerations for regular education students seeking transfer. Fact that non-resident school districts made transfer decisions on actual, as opposed to stereotypical needs of disabled students was not discriminatory. Moreover, plaintiffs could not proceed on request for accommodation theory, since: (1) any demand that non-resident school districts accept and provide requested special needs of all disabled students requesting transfer, even where said districts lacked services or space to accommodate said needs, would fundamentally alter defendant’s program; and (2) ADA did not require such fundamental alteration.