top of page
IEP STUDENT CENTER-FF-01 CLOSER.jpg

Court Cases

1954 Brown Separate Not Equal

Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U. S. 483 (1954) – Separate education for African-American children was not an equal education. ‘Separate but equal’ has no place in public education and that ‘separate educational facilities are inherently unequal.'”

1982 Rowley

Schools must have the skills to enable children to be prepared to lead productive, independent, adult lives to the maximum extent possible. Required districts to provide "adequate" services. One purpose of IDEA is to enable individuals to meet their unique needs and prepare them for employment and independent living.

1984 Nursing is Related Service

Irving Independent Sch. Dist. v. Amber Tatro, 468 U.S. 883 (1984) – Provision of nursing help was a “related service” under the IDEA and not a “medical service,” because the service was necessary for the student to attend school. No doctor means not medical service. “Congress sought primarily to make public education available to handicapped children and to make such access meaningful.”

1985 No FAPE = private

Burlington Sch. Committee v. Mass. Bd. of Ed., 471 U. S. 359 (1985) – Right of parents to be reimbursed for their expenditures for private special education. A school district may be required to reimburse when (1) the IEP and placement offered by the school district were inadequate or inappropriate (no FAPE) (2) the parents’ private placement was appropriate for their child’s needs, and (3) the balance of the equities favors reimbursement. Court has broad authority to fashion appropriate relief

1988 Honig

Honig v. Doe, 484 U.S. 305 (1988) - By enacting “stay put”, Congress intended “to strip schools of the unilateral authority they had previously used to exclude disabled students from school. The IEP is the “centerpiece of the [IDEA’s] education delivery system” and explained the “Importance and indeed the necessity of parental participation in both the development of the IEP and any subsequent assessments of its effectiveness.”

1993 Florence

Florence County School District Four v. Shannon Carter, 510 U.S. 7 (1993) – Standards by which a parent may obtain reimbursement for a private educational placement. Reimbursement does not necessarily require that the private school meet the IDEA’s definition of free appropriate public education or meet the state education standards.

2001 Buckhannon

Buckhannon v. West Virginia Dept. of Health and Human Resources, 532 U.S. 598, 121 S.Ct. 1835 (2001) – The Court ruled that in order to obtain attorney fees as a “prevailing party,” the party must secure either a judgment on the merits or a court-ordered consent decree.

2005 Schaffer

Schaffer v. Weast, 546 U.S. 49 (2005) – The Court held that, absent a state statute to the contrary, the party seeking relief bears the burden of proof in an administrative due process proceeding.

2006 Arlington

Arlington v. Murphy, 548 U.S. 291 (2006) – The provision of the IDEA authorizing “reasonable attorneys’ fees for prevailing parents does not authorize the recovery of fees for expert’s services.

2007 Winkelman

Jacob Winkelman v. Parma City School District, 550 U.S. 516 (2007) – Parents may pursue claims under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) on their own behalf, as the rights conferred to parents under the Act exist independently from the rights of their child.

2017 Endrew F.

Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District RE–1, 580 U.S. ___ (2017) - A school must offer an IEP reasonably calculated to enable a child to make progress appropriate in light of the child’s circumstances. Not “merely more than de minimis”

2023 Perez

Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools, 598 U.S. ___ (2023) - IDEA's requirement of exhaustion of administrative remedies does not apply to a suit seeking compensatory damages under the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Bold Title

Under the circuit court system, decisions in that circuit have the ability to influence subsequent decisions of state and federal courts in cases in that circuit that involve similar legal issues, which is known as “precedent”.  Typically, court rulings only impact the courts within the same legal system and circuit or “jurisdiction”.  However, in the world of education law, since decisions can be rare, decisions of other circuits are often considered.  Decisions of the Supreme Court are precedent for all circuit courts.

LEGAL HISTORY OF ENDREW F.:

  • State of Colorado, Administrative Law Judge   (PARENT/CHILD LOST)

  • U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado   (PARENT/CHILD LOST)

  • 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals   (PARENT/CHILD LOST)

  • United State Supreme Court   (PARENT WON!!!)​

bottom of page