State Court and Lower Federal Court Decisions

Journal of Law and Education, January 2003 | Go to article overview

State Court and Lower Federal Court Decisions


Decision in the 5th Cir. is unpublished.

This review reports all of the Supreme Court activity in education law reported by the BNA Supreme Court Reporter published during the months of July 1st, 2002-Sept. 30th, 2002.

Primary and Secondary Education

Constitutional Claims and Civil Rights

Student's parent sued school district alleging that son's expulsion violated his due process rights. A school district expelled a student after learning from a confidential informant that the student was one of five high school students planning to enter the school with guns and shoot several students and school officials. School officials notified the student of the expulsion hearing to be held at school district property. Despite a temporary restraining order restricting the student from school grounds, school officials faxed a message to student's counsel on the day of the hearing, encouraging the student to attend. The parent alleged that her son was not given a meaningful opportunity to be heard because the expulsion hearing was held on school property and a temporary restraining order prevented him from going to the school. Held: For the school district. The school district's expulsion procedures provided the student with notice of the charges against him, notice of the time of hearing and a full opportunity to be heard. Therefore, the school district did not violate the student's procedural due process rights. Remer v. Burlington Area Sch. Dist., 286 F.3d 1007 (7th Cir. 2002).

Students who had been expelled from school for violating dress code brought suit against city, board of education, and school board officials. Students were suspended and then expelled from school for violating the dress code and alleged that the enforcement of the school's dress code violated their rights and liberties under the Constitution and their rights to free public education. In addition, the parents of the students brought suit alleging that enforcement of dress code violated their right to exercise parental autonomy. Held: For the city, its board of education, and school board officials. The school dress code did not violate any right of freedom of speech or expression. The school dress code policy was rationally related to reducing actual disruptions and loss of instructional time caused by student's preoccupations with fashionable clothing. In addition, enforcement of the dress code did not deprive student of free public education. Finally, parents did not establish claim that their right to exercise parental autonomy was violated by enforcement of the school dress code. Byars v. City of Waterbury, 795 A.2d 630 (Conn. Super. 2002).

Suspended student and mother asked court to declare that the standard requiring a showing of substantial and competent evidence in student suspension hearings was unconstitutional. School used "substantial and competent" evidence as the standard of proof, as opposed to the more stringent "preponderance of the evidence" standard in public school suspension hearings. Suspended student and his mother alleged that the use of substantial and competent evidence standard at student suspension hearings creates an unacceptable risk of erroneous deprivation of the liberty and property interest of the student. Held: For the school board. Faithful adherence to that standard of proof assures protection of the student's constitutionally protected interests in a suspension hearing where the burden of proof and evidentiary rules imposed are not as stringent as in a formal trial. Therefore, the substantial and competent standard of proof does not violate a student's constitutional due process rights. In re Bd. of Educ. of the City Sch. Dist. of the City of N. Y. v. Mills, 741 N.Y.S.2d 589 (2002).

School district, school children, and taxpayers brought suit to declare State's system of funding public education unconstitutional. School district along with four poor school districts, five school children, and five taxpayers filed suit alleging that the State had not met its constitutional obligation to define an adequate education and that the provision for funding an adequate education was unconstitutional on its face. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

State Court and Lower Federal Court Decisions
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.