-
Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Children (PARC) versus the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
The PARC argued the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (PA) did not provide educational services to retarded children (Hannon, 1997).
The PA school systems Pennsylvania statues permitted exclusion from public education children who were difficult to educate(Hannon, 1997).
The court ruled retarded children would be assured a public education and support services funded by the state of PA (Hannon, 1997). The court laid the foundation for congress to defend students with disabilities. -
Mills v Board of Education (BOE) District of Columbia (DC)
In the case of Mills v BOE DC Mills argued students with disabilities were not receiving an appropriate education (Kalaei, 2008).
The BOE DC denied education to African American handicap children
The court ruled the Board of Education DC went against the rights the handicap children. The court ruled to provide education to all children regardless of their disability (Kalaei, 2008). The court helped secure the right of children with disabilities to receive a public education. -
Burlington School Committee (BSC) v Department of Education (DOE)
A parent represented by the BSC sought reimbursement for having to place a disabled child in a different school (Samuel, 2007).
The district (New York) argued the child did receive good education but the father did not feel his child was appropriately served.
The court ruled a parent can seek reimbursement for an alternate school setting(Samuel, 2007). The ruling of the court served to protect the right of disabled children to receive an appropriate education(Samuel, 2007). -
Board of Education (BOE), Sacramento City School District v Rachel Holland
Robert Holland father of Rachel Holland was disappointed his disabled daughter was unable to receive an appropriate education in her existing school district (Autman, 1995). Rachel's school restricted her academics as a result of her IQ score (Autman, 1995). The court ruled Rachel’s needs could be served in a regular setting with appropriate modifications. The ruling of the court laid the ground for compensation when an alternate placement is sought for a child with a disability.