Jessica Leu

Legal History Analysis

Facts: Amy Rowley was a deaf first grade student.

Board of Ed. Of Her parents requested a sign language interpreter to
Hendrick Hudson help her reach her full potential. School district
Central School decided Amy was doing well in school and didn’t need
District v. Rowley to have an interpreter to succeed.
Question: Does the school district need to provide
an interpreter to provide FAPE according to the
Education for all handicapped children act of 1975?
Yes: Amy does not understand all of what her non-
disabled peers. Amy would maximize her potential.
No: Amy is doing above average in school without an
interpreter. FAPE does not require schools to
maximize potential of students.
Decision: Supreme court reversed previous ruling
with Rowley by ruling in favor of the school district.
They stated that FAPE is providing a basic floor of
opportunity for students with disabilities, but are
not required to maximize student potential.
Facts: Amber Tatro was a three year old with
Irving Independent Spina-bifida. She needs to have a clean intermittent
School District v. catheterization performed every three to four
Tatro hours. She had speech, OT, and PT services in her
IEP. The CIC needs were not mentioned in the IEP.
Question: Does the school need to provide CIC
services as a part of FAPE for Amber?
Yes: It is a related service in the IEP. Amber
needs CIC during school hours. Parents have to
provide the service at their own cost.
No: CIC is a medical service. The school district
provides Amber with access to education. A licensed
physician should provide her CIC services.
Decision: The supreme court ruled that CIC is a
related service not a medical service, so the school
district needs to provide this service. Without this

7
 service Amber would not have access to FAPE.
Facts: Two students with emotional disabilities
attended the same school. One “John Doe” was
physically and verbally violent in school. He choked
Honig v. Doe another student and kicked out a window. The other
student “Jack Smith” stole money and made sexual
comments to female students. Both students were
suspended and the school district looked at expelling
John Doe.
Question: Can schools use expulsion as a disciplinary
action for students with disabilities, when behavior is
a result of the disability?
Yes: Students behavior inhibits the safety of all
students. The school needs to make sure students
are safe. There should be an exception for
dangerous situations in the suspension policy.
No: There is a maximum of 10-day suspension under
IDEA. Procedural safeguards protect students. IEP
team would have to meet to determine different
placement.
Decision: The supreme court ruled that the
behavior of the students were connected to their
disability, therefore expelling them from school
would violate the “Zero Reject” rule under IDEA
Foley v. Special Facts: Clare Foley was 11 with a mild mental
School District of retardation. She attended St. Peter’s Catholic
St. Louis County School. Parents were requesting that the Special
School District provide special education services at
St. Peters.
Question: Does Clare have the right to receive
special education services through the public school
district at her private school?
Yes: Clare needs special education services.
Parents opted to enroll Clare in a private school, but
they don’t provide the services she needs.
No: Missouri state law states public educators
cannot provide services on private school grounds.
Clare can enroll in public school to receive special

8
 education services.
Decision: The court decided that even after the
1997 amendments of IDEA that the school district
did not have to provide services to Clare at the
private school.
Facts: Beth is a 13-year-old student with Rett
Beth v. VanClay Syndrome. This caused Beth to have limited mobility
and communication abilities. The school district
wanted to place Beth in an educational life skills
program (ELS), but parents did not agree.
Question: is sending Beth to the ELS program
violating the LRE?
Yes: Beth would be moved to a different school.
She would not be with her non-disabled peers as
much.
No: The ELS program would be the best placement
for Beth. Her progress was being hindered in the
regular classroom.
Decision: The court decided that the school district
was providing the best option for Beth’s education.
The ELS program was not a violation of the LRE, as it
would best meet her specific needs.