STUCK DOWN LOCAL STATUTES AND REGULATIONS THAT EXCLUDED CHILDREN WITH DISABILITIES FROM SCHOOLS AND TRAINING PROGRAMS. 

ESTABLISHED THAT CHILDREN W/ DISABILITIES WERE TO BE AFFORDED ACCESS TO ADEQUATE, PUBLICLY SUPPORTED EDUCATED. 

SAID THESE CHILDREN HAD A RIGHT TO BE EDUCATED

ROWLEY

WHO WROTE THE OPINION? 

FIRST SUPREME COURT SPED CASE

(REHNQUIST) 

ANALYSES OF EVOLUTION OF SPECIAL EDUCATION.

SET

FAPE STANDARD : "SOME" BENEFIT

ANALYSIS OF FAPE: PROCEDURAL & SUBSTNATIVE PRONGS 

EDUCATION FOR HANDICAPS IS A FEDERAL GRANT -- ITS NOT ENTITLEMENT 

TATRO 

WHO WROTE THE OPINION?

BURGER OPINION

DEFINED SCOPE OF RELATED SERVICES

2 PRONGS:

SUPPORTIVE SERVICE NECESSARY (IF IT PREVENTS ACCESS THE DISTRICT MUST PROVIDE SERVICE) AND EXCEPTION - MEDICAL SERVICE

REHNQUIST OPINION 

ESTABLISHED PARENT RIGHT TO REIMBURSEMENT IF 2 PRONGS MET: 

PUBLIC PLACEMENT VIOLATED IDEA AND 

PRIVATE PLACEMENT PROPER 

COURT DOES NOT HOLD PARENTS TO THE SAME STANDARD AS THE DISTRICT 

BRENNAN OPINION 

FIRST DISCIPLINE CASE FOR S.C.

REMOVED SCHOOLS UNILATERAL AUTHORITY TO SUSPEND OR EXPEL STUDENTS WITH AN IEP. 

NO "DANGEROUSNESS EXCEPTION"

A CHILD W/ AN IEP CAN ONLY BE REMOVED FOR 10 DAYS 

-- MUST STILL PROVIDE FAPE EVEN IF EXPELLED

O'CONNOR OPINION

IF PARENTS OTHERWISE MEET THE TEST, THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO REIMBURSEMENT EVEN IF SCHOOL IS NOT CERTIFIED BY STATE FOR NON PUBLIC PLACEMENT 

TEST (1) did district offer fape? (2) did private placement offer fape? 

Caution:  prospective placements - CT cannot allow a school to keep a child in a placement that's not certified

Retrospective placement- can only reimburse 

Garrett 

Stevens Opinion 

Defined scope of related services

Under IDEA- cost is not a factor, must provide FAPE

(cost can be argument for LRE)

"Open the door of public education for all qualified children" 

O'Connor

Burden of proof (persuasion) is on the party seeking relief (usually parents) 

Alito Opinion

IDEA's award of attorney's fees to parents who prevail does not extend to the costs of expert services to parents who prevail 

Kennedy Opinon

Parents may pursue IDEA claims pro per, on their own behalf (have rights and claims independent of child)

Ct did not decide how to separate a parents right from a child's right when parent holds education rights.