Parent’s limited observations of autism class were insufficient to prove IDEA placement violation  

This case involved a challenge brought under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) by the parent of a child with autism.  The parent alleged the autism classroom proposed for her child was not safe, well staffed, or conducive to learning.  However, the parent’s sole evidence in support of this claim was her own testimony about her 20-minute visit to the classroom in question.  The Court found this evidence insufficient to prove the school district’s proposed placement would be inappropriate or deny the child a free appropriate public education, and it granted the district’s motion for involuntary dismissal.