News

Murphy, Hesse, Toomey & Lehane, LLP Attorney Presents Open Meeting and Public Records Law Training

 

Karis L. North, an attorney with Murphy, Hesse, Toomey & Lehane, LLP, presented  an introduction training on Open Meeting and Public Records Law to clients last month. The training covered the “who, what, where, when and why” of Massachusetts Open Meeting and Public Records Law. Attorney North took time to explain several key definitions, such as public body, subcommittee and quorum. Additionally, she gave examples of what is and is not a deliberation.

Ms. North has been practicing municipal and public sector law since 2006 and has over twenty years of experience counseling and resolving complex disputes for public clients. She is also an experienced litigator on behalf of municipalities and municipal agencies, private parties, and non-profit organizations. Her practice is focused on counseling and advocacy on behalf of municipal governments and agencies. She is the Town Counsel to the Town of Natick, and Special Counsel to the Towns of Dartmouth and Cohasset. In addition, she represents the Towns of Norwood, Milton, and Danvers, among others. Ms. North has a B.S. from Cornell University and received her J.D. cum laude from Vermont Law School, where she was the Managing Editor of the Vermont Law Review.  She is admitted to practice in state and federal courts in Massachusetts, Maryland, and before the Supreme Court of the United States. Active in the community, Ms. North is Vice President of the Massachusetts Municipal Lawyer’s Association and a member of the Vermont Law School Board of Trustees, where she chairs the Governance Committee.  She was also appointed to the inaugural Plymouth County Commission on the Status of Women and elected to the position of Chairwoman by her sister Commissioners.

Latest News

United States Supreme Court Opens the Door for Special Education Students’ Right to Bypass Due Process Hearings When Also Suing School District for Money Damages Under ADA: Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools, 598 U.S. ___(2023)

In a unanimous ruling issued on March 21, 2023, the United States Supreme Court decided in favor of a 27-year-old deaf student who sued his Michigan school district, claiming he was denied the services of a qualified interpreter for years, and was misled by teachers and administrators about his progress in school. The student, Miguel Perez, only sought monetary damages. The Court held that he was free to sue the district for money damages due to discrimination under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The Court found that he did not have to “exhaust his administrative remedies,” prior to bringing such an action for damages. The doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies in a case involving the rights of a disabled student requires a litigant to file and complete a due process hearing before an agency like the Bureau of Special Education Appeals (BSEA) on all claims stemming from a school district's requirement to provide a student with a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).

Legal Updates

United States Supreme Court Opens the Door for Special Education Students’ Right to Bypass Due Process Hearings When Also Suing School District for Money Damages Under ADA: Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools, 598 U.S. ___(2023)

In a unanimous ruling issued on March 21, 2023, the United States Supreme Court decided in favor of a 27-year-old deaf student who sued his Michigan school district, claiming he was denied the services of a qualified interpreter for years, and was misled by teachers and administrators about his progress in school. The student, Miguel Perez, only sought monetary damages. The Court held that he was free to sue the district for money damages due to discrimination under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The Court found that he did not have to “exhaust his administrative remedies,” prior to bringing such an action for damages. The doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies in a case involving the rights of a disabled student requires a litigant to file and complete a due process hearing before an agency like the Bureau of Special Education Appeals (BSEA) on all claims stemming from a school district's requirement to provide a student with a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).

Braintree, MA

50 Braintree Hill Office Park, Suite 410,
Braintree, MA 02184

Boston, MA

75-101 Federal Street
Boston, MA 02110

Tel: (617) 479-5000
Tel: (888) 841-4850
Fax: (617) 479-6469

Quincy, MA

Crown Colony Plaza
300 Crown Colony Drive, Suite 410
P.O. Box 9126
Quincy, MA 02169-9126

© 2023 Murphy, Hesse, Toomey & Lehane, LLP. All Rights Reserved. Website by Interactive Palette