IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

S.D., individually and on behalf

of D.D., a minor, 

CASE NO.:

Plaintiffs,

v. 

BROWARD COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD

and NOVA SOUTHEASTERN UNIVERISTY, INC., 

Defendants.

_____________________________________________/

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND JURY DEMAND

COME NOW the plaintiffs, S.D., individually and on behalf of D.D., a minor, by and 

through the undersigned counsel and sues the BROWARD COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD and 

NOVA SOUTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY, INC., and hereby alleges as follows: 

PARTIES

1. The plaintiff, D.C., (“parent”) is an individual, sui juris, who resides in BROWARD

County, Florida, and at all times relevant. 

2. The plaintiff, J.C., is a minor who has resides in BROWARD County, Florida, and at 

all times relevant. 

3. The Defendant, BROWARD COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD, (“Board” or “District”) is 

a corporate and governmental agency duly empowered by the constitution and statutes 

of the state of Florida to administer, manage, and operate the BROWARD County 

Public Schools (“BCPS.”) 

Case 0:22-cv-61420-WPD Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/29/2022 Page 1 of 8
COMPLAINT

Page 2 of 8

________________

4. The District receives state and federal funding for the education of children with 

disabilities. The Board meets the definition of a public entity under 42 U.S.C. §

12131.

5. Nova Southeastern University, Inc. (“NSU”) is a not for profit Florida Corporation 

doing business in Broward County, Florida. NSU contacts with BCPS to provide 

preschool special education to children with Autism in Broward County, Florida. 

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

6. Jurisdiction for this action vests pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 12131 for claims brought under 

the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990; 29 U.S.C. § 794, for claims brought under 

Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and for violations of D.D.’s civil rights; 

and the District Court’s pendent jurisdiction over the state claims alleged, which arise 

out of the same operative facts and circumstances.

7. Venue for this action lies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) in that the Board resides in 

the judicial district and the cause of action accrued in the judicial district.

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS

8. D.D. is a 5-year-old child with an autism spectrum disorder (ASD) who resides in 

Broward County, Florida, within the boundaries of Broward County Public Schools. 

D.D. has a date of birth of 11/07/2016 and a student Id # of 0620027494. D.D. is in 

preschool. 

9. The School Board of Broward County, Florida (“district”) is a corporate body and 

governmental agency, duly empowered by the Constitution and statutes of the State of 

Case 0:22-cv-61420-WPD Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/29/2022 Page 2 of 8
COMPLAINT

Page 3 of 8

________________

Florida to administer, manage and operate the public schools of Broward County, 

Florida. 

10. The District received state and federal funding for the education of children with 

disabilities. The District meets the definition of a public entity under 42 U.S.C. section 

12131. 

11. NSU contracts with Broward County School Board to provide prekindergarten students 

with disabilities and autism special education. 

12. Baudhuin preschool provides a language-based program for preschool children with 

autism. Classrooms incorporate social skills training, and TEACCH (Treatment and 

Education of Autism and Related Communication Handicapped Children) 

methodologies, i.e. independent work systems. Speech/language, behavioral, and 

occupational therapies are integrated into each child's classroom experience. In 

addition to educational programming, multi-dimension therapeutic support services are 

offered for children and families.

13. D.D. was found eligible for exceptional student education (ESE) services and remains 

eligible to date. 

14. D.D. has an individualized education plan (IEP) that identifies his educational needs 

and the supports and services the district is required to provide with fidelity in the least 

restrictive environment. 

15. During the 2019-2020 school year, D.D. attended preschool at Gator Run Elementary 

School. 

16. The placement at Gator Run Elementary school was not successful. The school did not 

have the appropriate supports and services for D.D. 

Case 0:22-cv-61420-WPD Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/29/2022 Page 3 of 8
COMPLAINT

Page 4 of 8

________________

17. Then in March 2020, the school system shut down and preschool students were one the

hardest hit by school closures, primarily because of the students’ age and the nature of 

preschool programs. The impacts were compounded for students with disabilities, like 

D.D. 

18. After the schools closed in person schooling, D.D. did not receive any instruction from 

his classroom teacher. His pre-school teachers posted suggested activities for parents 

to do with their children at home. The Occupational Therapist (O.T.) called and told 

D.D.’s mother that she did not think that D.D. would benefit from teletherapy because 

he needed someone to be hands on with him. Therefore, he received no O.T. There was

no contact by email or phone or services from his speech and language pathologist. 

There was no contact or services provided from any behavioral support teachers. 

19. As such, based upon the occurrences during the 2019 -2020 school and the events after 

district was required to stop in person schooling, the district, with the agreement of 

Baudhuin Oral School at NSU, agreed to allow D.D. to begin attending Baudhuin 

during the Summer of 2020 and that he would be allowed to repeat the 2019-2020 

school year at Baudhuin.

20. Rather than proceed to a due process hearing in 2020, the parties agreed to resolve the 

dispute by agreeing to placement of D.D. into the Baudhuin preschool at NSU for the 

2020-2021; 2021-2022; and 2022-2023 school years. 

21. Based upon this agreement, the family coordinated all D.D.’s related therapies and 

services to occur on the NSU campus and through the Baudhuin program. 

22. Baudhuin’s program is unique and one of a kind. 

Case 0:22-cv-61420-WPD Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/29/2022 Page 4 of 8
COMPLAINT

Page 5 of 8

________________

23. The ability to coordinate all the other supports and services for D.D. at the NSU campus 

is also unique and one of kind. 

24. The program and the ability to coordinate the additional supports and services cannot 

occur anywhere else within the district. 

25. In April 2020, the agreement was memorialized through email and Sherry Swanson, 

the preschool agency liaison confirmed the agreement and that an agreement to an 

additional year of preschool would in no way impact his placement at Baudhuin. 

26. The parties agreed to and understood that D.D. would remain at Baudhuin through the 

2022-2023 school year. 

27. D.D. began at Baudhuin in the summer of 2020. 

28. In October 2020, this agreement was reflected in the student's Individualized Education 

Plan (IEP). 

29. This agreement was reaffirmed again on May 23, 2022 in both the Individualized 

Education Plan (IEP) and the written notice issued that same date.

30. Baudhuin staff was present at all of these meetings from 2020 to the present and was 

in agreement with the same.

31. The student was retained by the district to attend preschool at Baudhuin in the 2022-

2023 school year. 

32. Baudhuin has a long history of accepting students or retaining students in the program

who are repeating preschool, as D.D. is in this case. 

33. During the Summer of 2022 and just weeks before the 2022-2023 school year was set 

to begin, the family was informally told that D.D. could not return to Baudhuin for the 

2022-2023 school year. 

Case 0:22-cv-61420-WPD Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/29/2022 Page 5 of 8
COMPLAINT

Page 6 of 8

________________

34. Then on July 8, 2022, legal counsel from NSU reached out directly to the family and

advised the family that the student would not be allowed to attend Baudhuin for the

2022-2023 school year. 

35. Upon information and belief, this decision to remove D.D. from Baudhuin was 

coordinated between the district and NSU. 

36. The district has offered no alternative placement for the 2022-2023 school year. 

37. The student is being removed from the Baudhuin program because of his disabilities

and because he is “one of the hardest students we have ever had here.”

38. The district and Baudhuin are deliberately indifferent to the needs of this student and 

the rights of the parents. 

39. S.D. has engaged Langer Law, P.A. to represent them and are obligated to pay a 

reasonable fee for their services. 

COUNT 1

BREACH OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

40. Plaintiffs repeat and re-allege the allegations in paragraphs 1 through 39 of the 

Complaint as if fully set forth herein.

41. Plaintiffs entered into a settlement agreement with a meeting of the minds of each 

parties’ obligations and responsibilities governed thereby. 

42. The settlement agreement set forth the terms of the agreement to resolve the issues 

between the district, with the expressed approval and agreement by NSU, and with 

sufficiently specificity, and as confirmed by the actions of the defendants from 2020 –

2022. 

Case 0:22-cv-61420-WPD Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/29/2022 Page 6 of 8
COMPLAINT

Page 7 of 8

________________

43. The Defendants are now attempting to circumvent the provision of the agreement that 

allowed for the student to remain at Baudhuin for the 2022-2023 school year. 

44. Thus, the Plaintiffs are seeking to enforce the settlement. 

WHEREFORE, S.D., individually and on behalf of D.D., respectfully request this Court to 

declare the actions of the Defendants to be a breach of the settlement agreement, issue an order 

allowing the student to return to school at Baudhuin for the 2022-2023 school year and award

Plaintiffs’ attorneys’ fees, costs and expenses incurred in this matter and for such further relief as 

the court deems just and equitable.

COUNT 2

VIOLATION OF TITLE II OF THE AMERICAN DISABILITIES ACT

45. Plaintiffs repeat and re-allege the allegations in paragraphs 1 through 39 of the 

Complaint as if fully set forth herein.

46. Plaintiffs further allege that the actions of the Defendants are discriminatory. 

47. The Defendants are recipients of federal financial assistance and are therefore subject 

to Title II of the ADA. 

48. The ADA provides a clear and comprehensive national mandate for the elimination of 

discrimination against individuals with disabilities. 42 U.S.C. § 12101(b)(1)&(2).

49. The ADA requires that “no qualified individual with a disability shall, by reason of 

such disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of the 

services, programs, or activities of a public entity, or be subjected to discrimination by 

any such entity.” 42 U.S.C. § 12132.

50. The actions of removing the student from the preschool program was done with

deliberate indifference to the impact that this exclusion would have on D.D. and his 

Case 0:22-cv-61420-WPD Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/29/2022 Page 7 of 8
COMPLAINT

Page 8 of 8

________________

parents and as such, the Plaintiffs are entitled to damages for the injuries as a result of 

these discriminatory action. 

WHEREFORE, S.D., individually and on behalf of D.D., respectfully request this Court to 

declare the actions of the Defendants violate the Americans with Disabilities Act, issue a 

permanent injunction enjoining the Defendant from discriminating against students with 

disabilities and awarding Plaintiffs’ attorneys’ fees, costs and expenses incurred in this matter and 

for such further relief as the court deems just and equitable.

JURY DEMAND

A TRIAL BY JURY IS DEMANDED FOR ALL ISSUES TRIABLE AS OF RIGHT BY A

JURY.

Dated this 29th day of July, 2022. 

LANGER LAW, P.A

By:__s/ Stephanie Langer_____

Stephanie Langer, Esq.

Florida Bar No: 149720

Langer Law, P.A.

2990 Southwest 35th Avenue 

Miami, Florida 33133 

T: (305) 570-0940 / F: (305) 204-9602

Email: slanger@langerlawpa.com

 admin@langerlawpa.com

 Attorneys for the Plaintiffs

Case 0:22-cv-61420-WPD Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/29/2022 Page 8 of 8