Appendix B: S.A. v. Tulare County Office of Education Emails are Not Educational Records if they are “Not Printed and Placed” in a Student’s File Pursuant to the applicable statute and regulation, TCOE was required to provide for inspection only those emails that personally identify Student and are maintained by TCOE. Student offers no evidence that TCOE failed to provide for inspection emails that were maintained in Student's file. Student admits that TCOE provided a "stack" of emails from 2006 and 2007 that were printed out and kept in Student's file. Moreover, the evidence that TCOE maintains Student's records in hard copy in Student's permanent file is not controverted. Student provides no evidence that TCOE maintains records electronically.3 Because TCOE was obligated to provide for inspection education records, see, 34 C.F.R. § 300.613, and the evidence supports California DOE's position that TCOE provided Student with the emails that TCOE maintained, this Court upholds California DOE's conclusion that TCOE was compliant with the applicable state and federal education laws. Accordingly, Student's first and second claims fail, and California DOE is entitled to summary judgment in its favor. FN3. This interpretation does not preclude or prohibit an educational institution from maintaining education records on an electronic database; however, questions related to electronic maintenance of records are inapplicable to the instant case. The non- controverted evidence demonstrates that TCOE only maintains records in hard-copy format. Thus, the Court does not reach the question of whether an educational institution should provide electronic records in their native file format if they are maintained electronically. ATTORNEYS’ FEES Introduction *8 Next, Student moves for summary judgment on its claim against TCOE for attorney’s fees. Student contends that he is entitled to recover attorney’s fees for the successful prosecution of the compliance complaint filed with the California DOE. Pursuant to 20 U.S.C. 1415(i)(3)(B)(1), this Court "in its discretion, may award reasonable attorney's fees as part of the costs . . . to a prevailing party who is the parent of a child with a disability." Successful plaintiffs are entitled to attorneys' fees and costs attributable to an administrative proceeding. McSomebodies v. Burlingame Elementary Sch. Dist. , 897 F.2d 974 (9th Cir. 1989). Student submits that he incurred $5,582.54 in attorney’s fees and costs for the successful prosecution of the compliance complaint. This total, according to the billing sheet submitted as Exhibit J to the Massey Declaration, is the sum of: (1) 3.1 hours by Timothy A. Adams ("Mr. Adams") at an hourly rate of $225; (2) 25.6 hours worked by Jenna Leyton ("Ms. Leyton") at an hourly rate of $175; (3) .4 hours of work by a person with the initials "SAT," who charged an hourly rate of $175; and (4) costs for postage, legal research, and copies in the amount of $335.04. "The most useful starting point for determining the amount of a reasonable fee is the number of hours reasonably expended on the litigation multiplied by a reasonable hourly rate." Riverside v.
BP 2001 – Confidentiality and Student Records
Page 27
Desert Mountain Charter Special Education Local Plan Area (DMCS) (rev. 11/16)
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online