Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Zucht v. King, 260 U.S. 174 (1922), [1] was a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court unanimously held that public schools could constitutionally exclude unvaccinated students from attending, even if there was not an ongoing outbreak. [2]
The case of LaFleur can also be seen as a building block for current family leave laws, e.g. Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993, which help to ensure that all people can keep their professions without giving up the ability, and the means, to have a family.
Cleveland Board of Education v. Loudermill, 470 U.S. 532 (1985), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that: certain public-sector employees can have a property interest in their employment, per Constitutional Due Process. See Board of Regents v. Roth
Procedural: On Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit: Holding; To meet its substantive obligation under the IDEA, a school must offer an Individualized Education Program (IEP) reasonably calculated to enable a child to make progress appropriate in light of the child’s circumstances.
Fry v. Napoleon Community Schools, 580 U.S. 154 (2017), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the Handicapped Children's Protection Act of 1986 does not command exhaustion of state-level administrative remedies codified in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) when the gravamen of the plaintiff's lawsuit is not related to the denial of free ...
Case history; Prior: Cert. to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit: Holding; The Court of Appeals' test for dissolving a desegregation decree is more stringent than is required either by this Court's decisions dealing with injunctions or by the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Court membership; Chief Justice
Pickering v. Board of Education, 391 U.S. 563 (1968), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that in the absence of proof of the teacher knowingly or recklessly making false statements the teacher had a right to speak on issues of public importance without being dismissed from their position. [1]
Murphy, 548 U.S. 291 (2006), was a United States Supreme Court case about experts' fees in cases commenced under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Justice Samuel Alito , writing for the majority, ruled that IDEA does not authorize the payment of the experts' fees of the prevailing parents. [ 1 ]