Board of Education v. Rowley
1982: the court ruled that a student is receiving an appropriate education as long as he/she is progressing and benefiting
... [Show More] from the instructional program.
Schools can go for the cheaper options as long as it is appropriate.
Brown v. Board of Education
1954 A cornerstone case in the civil rights movement in which the Supreme Court ruled that educating students in segregated facilities was inherently unequal and therefore unconstitutional. The ruling in this case was the premise for providing students with disabilities equal educational opportunities through the passage of federal legislation.
Pennsylvania Associated for Retarded Children (PARC) v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
1971: School denied disabled children access to public education. Court ruled that schools cannot predetermine educatability. Paved way for LRE, progress on admittance of school and due process.
Mills v. D.C. Board of Education
1972: In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that it was unconstitutional to exclude students from school programs who were identified as having behavior problems, emotional disturbance, hyperactivity, or mental retardation. Regardless of the degree of their disabilities, these students also had a right to an appropriate education.
Larry P. v. Riles
1974: Intelligence testing not appropriate as sole grounds for diagnosis
School Committee of the Town of Burlington v. Dept. of Education
1985: Established power of courts to order reimbursement for more-appropriate private schooling
Hobson v. Hansen
1967: Students were being placed into "special tracks" based upon race and IQ. Court ruled against it. Made way for placing students in LRE equal assessment processes and placement based on individual needs, not outside issues.
Diana v. California State Board of Education
1970: Court ruled that students must be assessed in their native language. Paved the way for evaluation and assessment processes to be provided in the student's native language. IQ testing cannot be the only form of assessment to determine placement.
Honig v. Doe
1988: Schools cannot exclude children from school indefinitely for any misbehavior that is disability-related but educational services could be ceased if the misbehavior is not related.
Important case for the implementation of due process and manifestation determinations. It also ensured FAPE was occurring.
Cedar Rapids Community School District v Garret F.
1999: Intensive nursing services falls under Related Services for IDEA
Irving Independent School District v. Tatro
1984: Parents wanted their daughter to receive catherization as a related service of her IEP. Court rulled that catheterization was a necessary service for a child with physical disabilities to remain in school if it can be performed by someone other than a physician. School is obligated to do so.
If special services are needed (medically and otherwise) unless they are to be performed by an expert in that field, the district must provide the services regardless of expense.
Danny R.R v State board of Education
1989: Parents said school districts failed to plac [Show Less]