§Why CasetextPricing

M.C. et al v. Wallingford-Swarthmore School District

MOTION to Vacate 12 Order,, Terminate Motions, TO DISSOLVE PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION OF JULY 12, 2010

3 Cited authorities

  1. Lunceford v. Dist. of Columbia Bd. of Educ

    745 F.2d 1577 (D.C. Cir. 1984)   Cited 145 times
    Holding that an educational placement has not "change[d]" unless a "fundamental change in, or elimination of, a basic element" of the student's educational program has occurred

  2. Johnson ex Rel. Johnson v. Sp. Educ. Hearing

    287 F.3d 1176 (9th Cir. 2002)   Cited 73 times
    Finding the automatic provision did not apply when the plaintiff sought an injunction for a claim regarding the validity of an existing stay-put order

  3. Pardini v. Allegheny Intermediate Unit

    420 F.3d 181 (3d Cir. 2005)   Cited 42 times
    Holding that the "plain meaning of 'current educational placement' refers to the operative placement actually functioning at the time the dispute first arises"