Wiscarson Law, A Professional Corporation

We used Diane to represent our daughter during a very stressful time...my husband was recovering from having a brain tumor removed, we were over whelmed. My daughters (high) school was not following her IEP and in doing so putting her in potentially dangerous situations. We hired Diane to help make sure the IEP was enforced. We paid her over 5k and at the IEP meeting she did nothing. She just said, "I think it's good"..The situation that prompted us to hire her was never addressed...The consequences of this created more hostility towards my daughter. We kept our daughter home after that.
Oct 13th, 2022

While I think there are good intentions here, in our situation we did not receive good service. We utilized their advocate services and ours did not remember the details of our case. Each time we met I noticed they didn't remember my child's name or the facts and would have to reference paperwork. Before each big meeting, I had to reach out and ask what our strategy was. We ended up in mediation and honestly I have no idea why, we had one round of IEP meetings with our advocates and likely could have continued there. It was not efficient and the end result is our child is not in school. The entire cost was 5k and we received very little beyond their attendance in IEP and mediation.
Aug 2nd, 2022

During consultation lawyer was not familiar enough with education law and argued without legal facts and knowledge. Markedly coercive into submitting one to her fallacious precepts even if they are pernicious to ones case. In one instance she argued that I couldn't disenroll my 7 year-old from school (I had already done it nearly six months ago) because he had already been enrolled in school for the past 3 years; and that she was surprised the school was not already coming after me (here lawyer is already instantly siding with the School District without legal facts and making the parent doubt in one's arguments) I retorted there is an exception to the law that allows parents to disenroll their children under 8 years of age. Yet, she continued to argue against what I was explaining to her. But here is the law: RCW 28A.225.015 Attendance mandatorySix or seven year oldsUnexcused absencesPetition. "(1) If a parent enrolls a child who is six or seven years of age in a public school, the child is required to attend and that parent has the responsibility to ensure the child attends for the full time that school is in session. ===>An exception shall be made to this requirement for children whose parents formally remove them from enrollment if the child is less than eight years old and a petition has not been filed against the parent under subsection" Anyone can find this in the State of Washington Legislature available online. Secondly, this lawyer wrongly stated that my Special Needs child would not be entitled to school transportation because I changed him from schools and that the law states that transportation does not have to be provided if a child is changed from schools. However, my child is not a regular student, he is a Special Needs child. There is no law under IDEA (federal law) that states that a Special Needs child would not qualify for transportation because he or she changed schools. There is no specific law for that. It is based on the Special-Needs child's actual special needs. My conclusion is, this lawyer is not adept to represent parents but rather School Districts. Due to lack of Education Lawyers in the region, lawyers, here, are quite chummy with the School Districts staff. Parents will automatically be at a disadvantage as these lawyers get the bulk of their income from advising school districts in Oregon and Washington. During the consultation, this lawyer, specifically demanded to know which staff member at the Special Services Department in the School District I had relayed my concerns to. It seemed very odd that this lawyer would insist upon obtaining this detail, at this specific point in time, that is to say, during initial consultation (when it had not even been, yet, agreed upon or even discussed if she would represent us), and this detail was completely irrelevant to demand. However, upon learning, it was the Special Services Director, Allan, this lawyer immediately quipped that she had known him for the last 10 years already. Nothing else was added to this, no reason why that would be important at all at this point. She did not even explain why she needed to know at this point. At the end of the call, the lawyer pushed to have another IEP meeting, by ourselves, alone, with the Special Services team and try to come to an agreement. This advise was so redundant, for then, What is the point for people obtaining lawyers at all? She was not listening and did not have the plaintiff's best interest, for if we meet again without representation, the School District will deny us most of the services our child needs, once again. In conclusion, lawyer's advise was pointless not instructive, not constructive and most definitely misinformed. In my experience, it is best to use the services from the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) such as utilizing facilitators and mediation to resolve problems with the school districts due to lack of legal representation in the region. Make sure to become familiar with their deadlines to file which are very short.
Mar 9th, 2024

We paid for a consultation after being referred by another lawyer. As I went over the timeline of events that took place, Diane cut me off and rudely asked well what do you want from all of this? and went on to give me advice on something we had already done but I didnt get to explain since she felt it necessary to cut me off mid-explanation. She dismissed our experience and said all parents have been in my shoes. Part of our concern was that our child was physically restrained by an educator and she responded its not illegal to do that so Im your feelings were hurt but theres not much to do with that and suggested we call an IFSP meeting which we already had. She was uninterested from the get go because I mistook the zoom for a phone call and was 5 minutes late. Rude. Crass. Unprofessional and appears to belong behind a barstool instead of a desk. Save your money and go elsewhere. I am giving 2 stars because the advocate Wendy seemed to be genuinely interested but Dianes unprofessionalism is disgusting. Id also like to note because of my tardiness, the meeting time was less than 30 minutes. I was told the consultation was for an hour.
Feb 29th, 2024

I am so thankful for Diane and her team. I am thankful for her knowledge of educational law, her kindness and for her willingness to advocate for my son and later for my daughter. She was instrumental in my son getting an appropriate IEP with appropriate goals. She was also instrumental in ensuring that my daughter was able to attend Transition Services to age 21. Upon meeting Diane, she let me know she was an advocate not for the parent, but for the child and what was best for my child. I found this to be the case. She always had the best interest of my son and my daughter in mind. It is clear that she cares deeply about her work and her clients. Once I hired Diane, I felt comfortable and confident attending IEP meetings. Diane is the person you want in your corner. My children have completed their education. However, if I ever needed an educational lawyer again, Diane and her team would be the law firm I would choose. I not only would recommend her, but I have recommended her to other parents that needed someone in their court.
Dec 24th, 2022