DR et al v. Michigan Department of Education et al

Filing 136

ORDER Requiring Plaintiff's to Provide a supplemental settlement summary--Signed by Magistrate Judge Anthony P. Patti. (MWil)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
D.R., a minor child, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.

Case No. 2:16-cv-13694
District Judge Arthur J. Tarnow
Magistrate Judge Anthony P. Patti

MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT
OF EDUCATION, et al.,
Defendants.
___________________________________/
ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFFS TO PROVIDE A SUPPLEMENTAL
SETTLEMENT SUMMARY IN ADVANCE OF THE DECEMBER 12, 2018
SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE
The Court previously invited the various parties to submit confidential, ex
parte, supplemental settlement statements to the Undersigned at their option, in
advance of the settlement conference which is scheduled to take place on
December 12, 2018. The parties are reminded that they may, but are not required
to do so, to the extent that they have not already done so.
The Undersigned has reviewed portions of the Plaintiffs’ October 15, 2018
motion for class certification, which is pending before Judge Tarnow, as well as
supplemental, ex parte settlement statements from some of the parties. In order to
facilitate a more meaningful settlement discussion next week, the Court has
determined that certain information is required from Plaintiffs in the form of a

supplemental settlement statement, to be submitted to the Undersigned and
separately served upon each defendant’s counsel by electronic means (but NOT to
be filed on the docket, as it shall constitute a settlement communication subject to
the protections of Fed. R. Evid. 408), on or before December 11, 2018 at 12:00
P.M. This supplemental settlement statement shall:
1.

Identify the statutory authority, or relevant case law decided
under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA),
which supports Plaintiffs’ position that the State of Michigan
Department of Education is obligated to supply funding in the
event that a local education authority is unable to meet its
independent IDEA obligations, if the shortfall in funding is
caused in any way by the local education authority’s failure to
adequately manage its financial matters or otherwise.

2.

With factual specificity, identify how the State of Michigan’s
IDEA state plan violates 20 U.S.C. § 1412(a)(5)(B) or 34 CFR
§ 300.114(b)(1) with respect to each plaintiff.

3.

Supply relevant IDEA case law where federal courts have
awarded relief against a state educational authority based
wholly or partially on 20 U.S.C. § 1412(a)(5)(B) or 34 CFR §
300.114(b)(1).

4.

Identify the specific Flint Community Schools (FCS) policy or
procedure, without respect to statistical data as to outcomes,
which demonstrates that FCS failed to provide
suspension/expulsion procedural safeguards to the parents of
the Plaintiffs or other proposed class members.

5.

Explain whether FCS has ever sought relief from the Michigan
Department of Education or the Genesee Intermediate School
District by FCS demonstrating that it is unable to provide
compliant special education services pursuant to Mich. Comp.
Laws § 380.1702. (FCS is likewise invited to weigh-in on this

issue, if it believes that this will enhance the settlement
discussion.)
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: December 6, 2018

s/Anthony P. Patti
Anthony P. Patti
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Certificate of Service
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was sent to parties of record
on December 6, 2018, electronically and/or by U.S. Mail.
s/Michael Williams
Case Manager for the
Honorable Anthony P. Patti