-
Brown v. Board of Education
Brown vs. Board of Education was a landmark case in school integration as well as the basis for future non-exclusion of children with disabilities from school. It ruled that separate but equal was not constitutional.
This court case is important because it was the end of the legalization of racial segregation as well as segregation on the basis of disability. -
PARC v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
The court case of Pennsylvania Association for R Citizens vs Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is an important landmark case because it ruled that in the state of Pennsylvania, no child could be denied access to an education on the basis of intellectual or developmental disability after school districts said certain students were "uneducable and untrainable."(Arocho, 2022)
This case is also interesting because it took place almost 20 years after Brown v Board, continuing to ask for the same rights. -
Rowley v. Hendrick Hudson School District
Rowley vs. Hendrick Hudson School District was a significant case in the interpretation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE). A deaf student was denied an interpreter since she was doing "fine" yet the court ruled that her education was not equal or adequate.
It is important because this case ruled that public schools must provide an appropriate education to students with disabilities, so all receive adequate and equal education -
Honig v. Doe
The case of Honig vs. Doe was centered around 2 disabled students who were "emotionally disturbed" and had trouble controlling their impulses and actions. When these students were expelled because of their behavior, their parents sued for the violation of IDEA.
This case is important because it ensures that those students with disabilities are entitled to a fair education regardless of misbehavior. It is interesting that previous cases continue to fight for the same right of adequate education. -
Timothy W. v. Rochester, New Hampshire, School District
Timothy was intellectually disabled and had many physical handicaps. Pediatricians said that Timothy had no potential educationally and wouldn't benefit from special education because of the severity of his disabilities.
The case of Timothy W v Rochester found that regardless of the presence or severity of a child's disabilities education is a right for all.It is is important because it reinforces that all school districts are responsible for developing appropriate education for every child. -
Doe v. Withers
A student had accommodations for oral opposed to written exams. His teacher Mr. Withers refused to follow the provisions in the student's IEP resulting in this student failing the class and becoming ineligible for extracurriculars. When the parents sued for damages, the court ruled that Mr. Withers pay compensatory and punitive damages.
This case establishes that teachers are responsible for implementing a students accommodations in their IEP and that administrators should ensure responsibility -
Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District
A student with autism was only entitled the bare minimum of his IEP according to his school district.
It was determined by the court that education programs provide more than the minimum. This case is important because it set the standard of a child's IEP enabling them to benefit and make progress in their education.
It is also interesting that in 2017, administrators still aren't giving children full benefits from their IEP -
Rogich v. Clark County School District
The daughter of the Rogich family needed literacy intervention for her dyslexia included in an IEP, which the district refused.Though they did come up with two IEPs, that literacy intervention failed to be included.
The court ruled in favor of the family, providing them with reimbursements for having to send their daughter to school out of state in order to receive the education she needed.
It is still very shocking and interesting that accommodations still aren't being given even nowadays.