In Dibuo v Board of Education of Worcester County, 37 IDELR 271 (4^th Cir., 2003), the Court was presented with a case in which the district failed to read or review professional evaluations provided by the parents supporting their child=s need for ESY.  Without that information, the IEP Team determined that ESY was not needed for the child to receive FAPE.  The parents appealed the decision.  An Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) ruled that the district=s IEP was appropriate, and therefore the lack of consideration of the parents= reports did

not deny the child FAPE.  The parents were denied reimbursement for their privately funded summer program.  The district court ruled in favor of the parents, ordering the district to reimburse the parents, and awarded attorneys= fees.  The Fourth Circuit vacated the judgment of the district court and the award of attorneys= fees and remanded the case to the district court for further proceedings in accordance with its opinion.  The Fourth Circuit held that a procedural violation of the  IDEA cannot support a finding that a

(Continued on page 4)