CTL v. Ashland School District

Dist. Ct. did not err in granting defendant-school district’s motion for summary judgment in plaintiff-student’s action under 504 of Rehabilitation Act, alleging that defendant’s failure to follow requirements in plaintiff’s section 504 plan regarding treatment for plaintiff’s diabetic condition while in school constituted disability discrimination. Section 504’s education requirement is less exacting than requirements under IDEA, and while defendant did not fully comply with all terms of 504 plan requiring specific number of staff being adequately trained to deal with plaintiff’s condition, said failure was minor and did not otherwise constitute failure to accommodate plaintiff’s disability, where record showed that plaintiff regularly attended school, performed well and suffered no adverse health consequences during his time in school. Also, plaintiff’s dispute with defendant regarding plaintiff’s ability to adjust his insulin was non-actionable where plaintiff essentially wanted to alter provisions of his own doctor’s orders.