The court reversed the district courts grant for a summary judgment. It held that compliance with obligations to children with hearing disabilities under IDEA does not signify compliance with obligations for effective communications under the ADA. In arriving at this conclusion, the court noted that there are differences between the provisions of the IDEA and those of Title II of the ADA. Because of this difference, failure of a claim under the IDEA does not necessarily exclude a claim under Title II of the ADA.
In A.C v. Shelby County Board of Education, A.C was a minor with type I diabetes. She attended Bon Lin Elementary school, which is governed by the Shelby County Board of Education SCBE. Her parents had requested certain disability accommodations for her. These accommodations included the retention of a full-time nurse, making the child’s classroom a peanut free zone due to her allergy to peanuts and taking of her blood tests in her classroom as opposed to the school clinic. There had been tensions between the school and the child’s parents regarding these requests. The situation got out of hand when the school principal made reports to the department of child services alleging that the parents were medically abusing the child. The parents filed a suit claiming that the violation of section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and the ADA. Section 504 and the ADA prohibits retaliations against individuals due to opposing practices made while seeking to enforce their rights under these Acts. ...Show more