§Why CasetextPricing

LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT v. GARCIA

Respondent’s Answer Brief on the Merits

49 Cited authorities

  1. Nken v. Holder

    556 U.S. 418 (2009)   Cited 3,292 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "courts must be mindful that the Government's role as the respondent in every removal proceeding does not make the public interest in each individual one negligible"

  2. A.C.S.D.B.E. v. Murphy

    548 U.S. 291 (2006)   Cited 509 times
    Holding parents cannot recover expert witness fees under the IDEA attorney fee provision because Congress did not "unambiguously" authorize such an award and the term of art "costs" is a reference to 28 U.S.C. § 1920, "the general statute governing the taxation of costs in federal court"

  3. Bedroc Ltd. v. United States

    541 U.S. 176 (2004)   Cited 509 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding a court presumes that Congress says in the statute what it means

  4. Dyna-Med, Inc. v. Fair Employment Housing Com

    43 Cal.3d 1379 (Cal. 1987)   Cited 888 times
    Holding that the statute did not extend to cover remedies that were “different in kind from the enumerated remedies,” because “ more reasonable reading of the phrase ‘including, but not limited to,’ ... permitting only additional corrective remedies comports with the statutory construction doctrines of ejusdem generis, expressio unius est exclusio alterius and noscitur a sociis.”

  5. Moyer v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd.

    10 Cal.3d 222 (Cal. 1973)   Cited 534 times
    Finding statutes should be construed in light of the statutory framework as a whole

  6. Union School Dist. v. Smith

    15 F.3d 1519 (9th Cir. 1994)   Cited 268 times
    Holding the absence of other autistic children and the lack of training for teachers on working with autistic children, among other deficiencies, made a particular school inappropriate

  7. Handberry v. Thompson

    436 F.3d 52 (2d Cir. 2006)   Cited 148 times
    Holding that 18 U.S.C. § 3626 limits § 1367 even though the former statute makes no reference to § 1367

  8. Khajavi v. Feather River Anesthesia Medical

    84 Cal.App.4th 32 (Cal. Ct. App. 2000)   Cited 112 times
    Holding that unlike wrongful discharge based on an implied contract, employment for a specified term may not be terminated prior to the term's expiration based upon employer's honest but mistaken belief of misconduct

  9. In re Hoddinott

    12 Cal.4th 992 (Cal. 1996)   Cited 100 times

    Docket No. S045940. March 25, 1996. Appeal from Superior Court of Marin County, No. SC61122, Richard H. Breiner and John Stephen Graham, Judges. COUNSEL Donald Specter and Eve Shapiro for Petitioner. Daniel E. Lungren, Attorney General, George Williamson, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Ronald A. Bass, Assistant Attorney General, Laurence K. Sullivan, Lisa M. Castor, Rene A. Chacon, Catherine A. Rivlin, Michael E. Banister and Jeffrey M. Bryant, Deputy Attorneys General, for Respondent. OPINION

  10. New Hampshire Motor Transport Ass'n v. Rowe

    448 F.3d 66 (1st Cir. 2006)   Cited 51 times
    Holding that the FAAAA does not preempt generally applicable statute prohibiting carriers from acting as "knowing accomplices to the illegal sale of tobacco products," but finding that state may not "dictate the procedures that a carrier should employ to locate these products in its delivery chain"

  11. Section 1415 - Procedural safeguards

    20 U.S.C. § 1415   Cited 7,174 times   17 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "before the filing of a civil action . . . seeking relief that is also available under [the IDEA], the [IDEA's administrative] procedures . . . shall be exhausted"

  12. Section 1412 - State eligibility

    20 U.S.C. § 1412   Cited 3,331 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding the SEA "responsible for ensuring that . . . the requirements of [the IDEA] are met" and "all educational programs . . . meet the educational standards of the [SEA]"

  13. Section 1401 - Definitions

    20 U.S.C. § 1401   Cited 2,872 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Defining such plans

  14. Section 1414 - Evaluations, eligibility determinations, individualized education programs, and educational placements

    20 U.S.C. § 1414   Cited 2,731 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Defining assessments as tools used during an evaluation or re-evaluation to ensure a child is evaluated in "all areas of suspected disability" and to determine "an appropriate educational program for the child."

  15. Section 2 - Liberal construction

    Cal. Ed. Code § 2   Cited 1,060 times

    The code establishes the law of this state respecting the subjects to which it relates, and its provisions and all proceedings under it are to be liberally construed, with a view to effect its objects and to promote justice. Ca. Educ. Code § 2 Enacted by Stats. 1976, Ch. 1010.

  16. Section 20 - Continuation to hold office

    Cal. Ed. Code § 20   Cited 153 times

    All persons who, at the time this code goes into effect, hold office under any of the acts repealed by this code, which offices are continued by this code shall continue to hold them according to their former tenure. Ca. Educ. Code § 20 Enacted by Stats. 1976, Ch. 1010.

  17. Section 56000 - Legislative findings and declaration generally

    Cal. Ed. Code § 56000   Cited 98 times

    (a) The Legislature finds and declares that all individuals with exceptional needs have a right to participate in free appropriate public education and special educational instruction and services for these persons are needed in order to ensure the right to an appropriate educational opportunity to meet their unique needs. (b) The Legislature further finds and declares that special education is an integral part of the total public education system and provides education in a manner that promotes

  18. Section 48200 - Persons between ages of 6 and 18 subject to compulsory full-time education

    Cal. Ed. Code § 48200   Cited 80 times

    Each person between the ages of 6 and 18 years not exempted under the provisions of this chapter or Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 48400) is subject to compulsory full-time education. Each person subject to compulsory full-time education and each person subject to compulsory continuation education not exempted under the provisions of Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 48400) shall attend the public full-time day school or continuation school or classes and for the full time designated as the

  19. Section 56026 - Individuals with exceptional needs

    Cal. Ed. Code § 56026   Cited 55 times
    Setting forth the four eligibility criteria for a "specific learning disability"

  20. Section 56501 - Due process hearing procedures

    Cal. Ed. Code § 56501   Cited 46 times
    Providing a due process hearing when there is a "refusal to initiate or change the identification, assessment, or educational placement of the child or the provision of a free appropriate public education to the child"

  21. Section 300.101 - Free appropriate public education (FAPE)

    34 C.F.R. § 300.101   Cited 60 times   1 Legal Analyses

    (a)General. A free appropriate public education must be available to all children residing in the State between the ages of 3 and 21, inclusive, including children with disabilities who have been suspended or expelled from school, as provided for in § 300.530(d) . (b)FAPE for children beginning at age 3. (1) Each State must ensure that- (i) The obligation to make FAPE available to each eligible child residing in the State begins no later than the child's third birthday; and (ii) An IEP or an IFSP

  22. Section 300.2 - Applicability of this part to State and local agencies

    34 C.F.R. § 300.2   Cited 51 times
    Applying IDEA to state and local correctional facilities

  23. Section 300.102 - Limitation-exception to FAPE for certain ages

    34 C.F.R. § 300.102   Cited 38 times
    Stating that the obligation to provide FAPE does not apply to "[c]hildren with disabilities who have graduated from high school with a regular high school diploma."

  24. Section 300.149 - SEA responsibility for general supervision

    34 C.F.R. § 300.149   Cited 9 times

    (a) The SEA is responsible for ensuring- (1) That the requirements of this part are carried out; and (2) That each educational program for children with disabilities administered within the State, including each program administered by any other State or local agency (but not including elementary schools and secondary schools for Indian children operated or funded by the Secretary of the Interior)- (i) Is under the general supervision of the persons responsible for educational programs for children

  25. Rule 8.520 - Briefs by parties and amici curiae; judicial notice

    Cal. R. 8.520   Cited 3,160 times

    (a)Parties' briefs; time to file (1) Within 30 days after the Supreme Court files the order of review, the petitioner must serve and file in that court either an opening brief on the merits or the brief it filed in the Court of Appeal. (2) Within 30 days after the petitioner files its brief or the time to do so expires, the opposing party must serve and file either an answer brief on the merits or the brief it filed in the Court of Appeal. (3) The petitioner may file a reply brief on the merits or

  26. Rule 8.548 - Decision on request of a court of another jurisdiction

    Cal. R. 8.548   Cited 210 times

    (a)Request for decision On request of the United States Supreme Court, a United States Court of Appeals, or the court of last resort of any state, territory, or commonwealth, the Supreme Court may decide a question of California law if: (1) The decision could determine the outcome of a matter pending in the requesting court; and (2) There is no controlling precedent. (Subd (a) amended effective January 1, 2007.) (b)Form and contents of request The request must take the form of an order of the requesting