-
Smith v. Robinson
Legal representation is a right for parents who succeed in the legal proceedings in regard to special need cases. Much discussion was had doubting this in 1984 but was overturned in 1986. It had to occur when they introduced into law the Handicapped Children Protection Act. Parents must ensure their student is receiving adequate services and if not legal help is needed. Link: https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/osg/briefs/2016/05/26/15-497_tsac_fry_v._napoleon_community_schools.pdf -
Cedar Rapids Community School District v. Garret F.
I found this case to be little confusing as medical care can vary from city to city and state to state. Each side was correct in their argument but the final liability for this extensive need from Garrett should not fall on school system. The supreme court does require the nursing needs but the expense was not, I believe, what the IDEA ruling meant to attend to. The ability to educate, if achieved, is most real Link: http://www.wrightslaw.com/law/caselaw/case_Cedar_Rapids_SupCt_990303.htm -
Winklemanv v. Panama City School District
The Winkelmanv stated their son wasn't getting equal education and there case wasn't heard because they had no lawyer. They wanted school district to pay for private education. The local court did not rule on their side. They didn't want IDEA to advocate for parent not students. Thankfully the Supreme Court overturned this ruling on the presumption the #1 advocate for child is the parents. This ruling also forced schools to do more.
Link: https://www.oyez.org/cases/2006/05-983
