As a result, confidential information about Sean and his family was widely distributed. Following the administrative review, the parents requested a due process hearing pursuant to 34 C.F.R. 300.506, et seq, to challenge the appropriateness of plaintiff's educational program from 1988-1990 and to obtain reimbursement for expenditures for language and educational evaluations as well as psychotherapy. Complaint PP11, 12. Complaint PP15, 16. Then the Woodbridge released plaintiffs' names to the New Haven Register, which published the names.
Plaintiffs also allege that the family name was identified without consent.
Complaint PP21, 22. A motion to dismiss involves a determination as to whether plaintiff has stated a claim upon which relief can be granted. To state a claim under 1983, plaintiffs must allege a violation of a right secured under federal law or the constitution. Although defamation of reputation alone is not sufficient to activate the due process clause, interests that are either altered or abolished by governmental disclosure are protected. The right to privacy does include the individual's interest in disclosure of personal information as well as autonomy rights.