22 Cited authorities

  1. Union School Dist. v. Smith

    15 F.3d 1519 (9th Cir. 1994)   Cited 267 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
  2. NASD Dispute Resolution, Inc. v. Judicial Council of Cal.

    488 F.3d 1065 (9th Cir. 2007)   Cited 72 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that appeal was moot because other circumstances had already provided plaintiffs "the relief sought by them in this case"
  3. U.S. v. Howard

    480 F.3d 1005 (9th Cir. 2007)   Cited 57 times
    Holding that this exception to the mootness doctrine applied to challenges to a court policy requiring criminal defendants to be shackled during their initial appearances
  4. Katz v. Los Gatos-Saratoga Joint Union High School Dist.

    117 Cal.App.4th 47 (Cal. Ct. App. 2004)   Cited 32 times

    No. H024944 March 25, 2004 Appeal from the Superior Court of Santa Clara County, No. CV767833, Thomas C. Edwards, Judge. Miller Brown Dannis and Sue Ann Salmon Evans for Defendant and Appellant. Aaron L. Katz, in pro. per., for Plaintiff and Respondent. WUNDERLICH, J. Aaron Katz owns property that straddles two school districts. One of them, the Los Gatos-Saratoga Joint Union School District (District), refused to enroll children living at Katz's property. That prompted this legal action by Katz

  5. U.S. v. Tanoue

    94 F.3d 1342 (9th Cir. 1996)   Cited 23 times

    No. 95-15436 Argued and Submitted July 9, 1996 — San Francisco, California Filed September 6, 1996 Richard P. McClellan, III, Honolulu, Hawaii, for defendant-appellant. John A. Dudek, Jr., United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for plaintiff-appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Hawaii. Harold M. Fong, Chief Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CV-94-00096 HMF. Before: Herbert Y. C. Choy, Diarmuid F. O'Scannlain and Edward Leavy, Circuit Judges. The memorandum

  6. Orange County Dept. of Educ. v. A.S.

    567 F. Supp. 2d 1165 (C.D. Cal. 2008)   Cited 4 times

    No. SACV 08-77 JVS (MLGx). July 10, 2008 David C. Larsen, Jennifer Brown, Karen Keating-Van Dijk, S. Daniel Harbottle, Rutan Tucker, Costa Mesa, CA, for Plaintiff. Kathleen Muraco Loyer, Kathleen M. Loyer Law Offices, San Clemente, CA, for minor, A.S. Gabriel C. Vivas, California Dept. of Education, Sacramento, CA, for California Department of Education. Kevin S. Reed, Diane H. Pappas, Donald A. Erwin, Los Angeles Unified School District, Office of the General Counsel, Los Angeles, CA, for Los Angeles

  7. Section 1400 - Short title; findings; purposes

    20 U.S.C. § 1400   Cited 6,494 times   12 Legal Analyses
    Finding of Congress that "the education of children with disabilities can be made more effective by ... ensuring that families ... have meaningful opportunities to participate"
  8. Section 1412 - State eligibility

    20 U.S.C. § 1412   Cited 3,307 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]"
  9. Section 1413 - Local educational agency eligibility

    20 U.S.C. § 1413   Cited 265 times
    Providing detailed requirements for school districts to receive funding under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
  10. Section 8 - Construction of words giving joint authority to three or more officers

    Cal. Ed. Code § 8   Cited 147 times

    Words giving a joint authority to three or more public officers or other persons are construed as giving such authority to a majority of them, unless it is otherwise expressed in the provisions of the code giving the authority. Ca. Educ. Code § 8 Enacted by Stats. 1976, Ch. 1010.

  11. Section 56026 - Individuals with exceptional needs

    Cal. Ed. Code § 56026   Cited 55 times
    Setting forth the four eligibility criteria for a "specific learning disability"
  12. Section 56150 - Generally

    Cal. Ed. Code § 56150   Cited 10 times

    Special education programs authorized by this part shall be provided, pursuant to Section 48645.2, for individuals with exceptional needs who have been adjudicated by the juvenile court for placement in a juvenile hall or juvenile home, day center, ranch or camp, or for individuals with exceptional needs placed in a county community school pursuant to Section 1981. Ca. Educ. Code § 56150 Amended by Stats. 1985, Ch. 795, Sec. 3.

  13. Section 56028 - Parent

    Cal. Ed. Code § 56028   Cited 9 times

    (a) "Parent" means any of the following: (1) A biological or adoptive parent of a child. (2) A foster parent if the authority of the biological or adoptive parents to make educational decisions on the child's behalf specifically has been limited by court order in accordance with Section 300.30(b)(1) or (2) of Title 34 of the Code of Federal Regulations. (3) A guardian generally authorized to act as the child's parent, or authorized to make educational decisions for the child, including a responsible

  14. Section 48204 - Compliance with residency requirements

    Cal. Ed. Code § 48204   Cited 8 times

    (a) Notwithstanding Section 48200, a pupil complies with the residency requirements for school attendance in a school district if he or she is any of the following: (1) (A) A pupil placed within the boundaries of that school district in a regularly established licensed children's institution or a licensed foster home as defined in Section 56155.5, or a family home pursuant to a commitment or placement under Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 200) of Part 1 of Division 2 of the Welfare and Institutions

  15. Section 56041 - District responsible for providing education and related services to pupils between ages of 18 to 22 years

    Cal. Ed. Code § 56041   Cited 7 times

    Except for those pupils meeting residency requirements for school attendance specified in subdivision (a) of Section 48204, and notwithstanding any other provision of law, if it is determined by the individualized education program team that special education services are required beyond the pupil's 18th birthday, the district of residence responsible for providing special education and related services to pupils between the ages of 18 to 22 years, inclusive, shall be assigned, as follows: (a) For

  16. Section 48645.2 - Administration and operation

    Cal. Ed. Code § 48645.2   Cited 7 times

    The county board of education shall provide for the administration and operation of juvenile court schools established pursuant to Section 48645.1 : (a) By the county superintendent of schools, provided that, in any county in which the board of supervisors is establishing or maintaining juvenile court schools on January 1, 1978, the county superintendent of schools may contract with the board of supervisors for the administration and operation of such schools if agreed upon between the board of education

  17. 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."
  18. Section 3085 - Precedent Decisions

    Cal. Code Regs. tit. 5 § 3085   Cited 2 times

    Notwithstanding Government Code section 11425.10(a)(7) of the APA, orders and decisions rendered in special education due process hearing proceedings may be cited as persuasive but not binding authority by parties and hearing officers in subsequent proceedings. Cal. Code Regs. Tit. 5, § 3085 1. New section filed 6-23-97 as an emergency; operative 6-23-97 (Register 97, No. 26). A Certificate of Compliance must be transmitted to OAL by 10-21-97 or emergency language will be repealed by operation of

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

    Cal. R. 8.548   Cited 208 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