-
Tatro v. Texas July 5, 1984
The school feels they should not provide these services because it is a procedure that should be done by a doctor or licensed person. They felt she was being discriminated against because of her condition. Although her parents, babysitter, and teenage brother were all qualified to administer CIC (clean intermittent catheterization) Amber was not at the time. http://massadvocates.org/irving/ -
Period: to
Honig v. Doe January 20, 1988
The school’s position was that students like Doe and Smith, pose a danger to the other students and that the faculty and other staff were also in danger due to their uncontrolled lack of anger management and their explosive outbursts. They both were considered an EAHCA-eligible student in the San Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD).
https://www.questia.com/read/1G1-7936643/honig-v-doe-the-suspension-and-expulsion-of-handicapped -
Period: to
Winkelman v. Parma City School District May 21, 2007
.The Winkelman's filed a complaint alleging that the school had failed to provide a free appropriate public education for their son. The District Court granted defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings, finding it had provided Jacob with a free appropriate public education. The parents did not agree with the decision and filed an appeal with the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. http://www.wrightslaw.com/law/caselaw/ussupct.winkelman.parma.htm#sthash.k9BrKhhl.dpuf