### 2002 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t a t e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit

2-5-2002 

# D . v . W C hes t e r Ar e a S ch

P r e c e de n t i al or N on-P r e c e de n t i al :

D ock e t 1-1775

F o l lo w thi s a nd a dd it ion al w ork s a t : h tt p://d i g it alc ommon s .l a w

. v i l l a no v a

. e du/thir dc ir c uit_2002

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou gh t t o y ou for f r e e a nd ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t a t e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit a t V i l l a no v a U niv e r sit y S choo l of L a

w Di g it al R e posit or y

. I t h as be e n a c c e pt e d for inclusion in 2002 D e c i sion s b y a n a uthor i z e d a dmini s tr a t or of V i l l a no v a U niv e r sit y S choo l of L a

w Di g it al R e posit or y

. F or mor e infor m a t ion, p le as e c on t a ct Be n j a min

. C a rl s on@l a

w

. v i l l a no v a

. e du

. 

### R e c omme nde d C it a t ion

" D . v . W C he s t e r Ar e a S ch " (2002). 2002 D e cisio n s

. P a pe r 98. h tt p://d i g it alc ommon s .l a

w

. v i l l a no v a

. e du/thir dc ir c uit_2002/98REPORTED - NOT PRECE DENTIAL

THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

___________

No. 01-1775

___________

NICOLE D., A MINOR BY HER PARENTS AND NEXT FRIEN DS; SHELLY D. F.; JOHN M., NICOLE D., INDIVIDUALLY AND ON HER OWN BEHALF, Appellants

v.

THE WEST CHESTER AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT

___________

ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVAN IA

(D.C. Civil No. 00-cv-03480) District Judge: The Honorable Harvey Bartl e, III

___________
ARGUED JANUARY 22, 2002

BEFORE: NYGAARD and STAPLETON, Circuit Ju dges, and CAPUTO, District Judge.

(Filed: February 4, 2002)

Dennis C. McAndrews, Esq. (Argued) Monahan & McAndrews 125 Strafford Avenue, Suite 108 Wayne, PA 19087 Counsel for Appellants

Andrew E. Faust, Esq. (Argued) Chester County Intermediate Unit Educational Legal Services 535 James Hance Court Exton, PA 19341 Counsel for Appellee

___________

MEMORANDUM OPINION OF THE COURT

___________NYGAARD, Circuit Judge.

This appeal is from an order of the Distri ct Court which affirmed a decision by a Pennsylvania Special Education Appeals Panel. Appellants allege as error the issues listed in paragraph I, taken verbatim from their br ief. Because we conclude that the District Court did not err, we will affirm. I. The allegations of error asserted by appel lants are as follows: 1. Did the lower court err in findin g that Nicole was not an eligible student under either the Individuals with Disabili ties Education Act or Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973? 2. Did the lower court err in failin g to reimburse Nicole's parents for tuition paid to a private school and related expen ses, after the school district failed to provide her with special education and related services? 3. Did the lower court abuse its dis cretion in refusing to admit additional evidence in support of Nicole's claims?

II. The facts and procedural history of this c ase are well known to the parties and the court, and it is not necessary that we rest ate them here. The court has heard oral argument on the issues presented to us in this appe al. The reasons why we write an opinion of the court are threefold: to instruct the District Court, to educate and inform the attorneys and parties, and to explain our decision. None of these reasons are presented here. We use a Memorandum Opinion in cases such as this, in which a published opinion is rendered unnecessary because the opinion has no institutional or precedential value. See United States Court of Appeals for the Third Ci rcuit, Internal Operating Procedure (I.O.P.) 5.2. Under the usual circumstances when w e affirm by Memorandum Opinion and Judgment, we "briefly set[] forth the reasons s upporting the court's decision...." I.O.P. 5.4. In this case, however, we have conclud ed that neither a full memorandum explanation nor a published opinion is indicated be cause of the very extensive and thorough opinion filed by Judge Bartle of the Distr ict Court. Judge Bartle's opinionadequately explains and fully supports its order an d refutes the

appellant's allegations of error. Hence, we believe it wholly unnecessary to further opine, or offer additional explanations and reasons to those given by the Dist rict Court, why we will affirm. It is a sufficient explanation to say that, essentially for the reasons given by the District Court in its opinion dated the 19th day of March, 2001, we w ill affirm. III. In sum, for this reason, we will affirm th e order of the District Court dated March 19, 2001.

_________________________

TO THE CLERK:

Please file the foregoing opinion.

/s/ Richard L. Nygaard Circuit JudgeTHE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

___________

No. 01-1775

___________

NICOLE D., A MINOR BY HER PARENTS AND NEXT FRIEN DS; SHELLY D. F.; JOHN M., NICOLE D., INDIVIDUALLY AND ON HER OWN BEHALF, Appellants

v.

THE WEST CHESTER AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT

___________

ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVAN IA

(D.C. Civil No. 00-cv-03480) District Judge: The Honorable Harvey Bartl e, III

___________
ARGUED JANUARY 22, 2002

BEFORE: NYGAARD and STAPLETON, Circuit Ju dges, and CAPUTO, District Judge.

___________

JUDGMENT

___________

This cause came to be heard on the record from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and was argued by counsel on January 22, 2002. On consideration whereof, it is now here O RDERED AND ADJUDGED by this Court that the order of the said District Cour t entered on March 19, 2001, be, and the same is hereby affirmed. Costs taxed against appellant.All of the above in accordance with the op inion of this Court.

ATTEST:

____________________ _____________ Clerk

Dated: 4 February 2002