In an Individuals with Disabilities Education Act action, the district court's order denying reimbursement to plaintiff-parents for their child's residential treatment is affirmed where: 1) the district court adequately responded to the hearing officer's conclusions before reaching a contrary result; 2) parents' failure to give notice was a relevant consideration when determining whether to deny reimbursement; and 3) the record contained ample evidence supporting the district court's conclusion that the parents placed the child in residential care to treat medical, not educational, problems.
Argued and Submitted October 8, 2009
Filed December 7, 2009
Opinion by Judge O'Scannlain
Mary E. Broadhurst, Eugene, OR
Andrea L. Hungerford and Nancy J. Hungerford, Hungerford Law Firm, LLP, Oregon City, OR