Academic journal article Journal of Law and Education

Recent Decisions - SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

Academic journal article Journal of Law and Education

Recent Decisions - SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

Article excerpt

Review Denied

Decisions without published opinion in lower court

DOCKET NO: 14-422

NAME: Young-Gibson v. Bd. of Educ. of City of Chicago

DATE CERT. DENIED: 12/15/2014

CITATION: - S. Ct. -, 83 U.S.L.W. 3365

DOCKET NO: 14-218

NAME: D. D-S v. Southold Union Free Sch. Dist.

DATE CERT. DENIED: 11/3/2014

CITATION: - S. Ct. -, 83 U.S.L.W. 3265

Decisions with published opinion in lower court

DOCKET NO: 14-604

NAME: E.M. v. Pajaro Valley Unified Sch. Dist.

DATE CERT. DENIED: 1/12/2015

CITATION: - S. Ct. -, 83 U.S.L.W. 3579

Case Below: 758 F.3d 1162

Parents brought suit challenging schools district's determination that their child did not qualify for special education services. A student was tested for learning disabilities and found to have an auditory processing disorder. He was given three different I.Q. tests. Each test yielded a different score. The school district used the middle score (104) as the most likely measure of the student's intelligence. California required a 22.5point difference between a child's I.Q. score and their performance score in any of seven different areas in order for them to be eligible for special education services. The student's lowest performance score was 87, yielding a difference of 17. Using this number, the district ruled the student to be ineligible for special education. The student's parents filed a complaint with the California Office of Administrative Hearings, claiming the school district should have used the highest I.Q. score (111) in the calculations. An administrative law judge (ALJ) found for the school district. …

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed

Oops!

An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.