9/5/2010 Case Law Matrix

Name: Raj Sharma Term: Fall 2007-08

Issue Case(s) Date Findings/ Dissenting/ Local Concern/

Results of the Opposing School Policy Handbook

Case
1. Attendance Pierce vs. Society 1925 The Oregon Compulsory
of Sisters Education Act that
required attendance at
public schools was held
unconstitutional under the
Due Process Clause of the
Fourteenth Amendment.
The Supreme Court did,
however, indicate that the
State has the power to
require children to attend
some school and the power
to regulate schools to
ensure that they are doing
a good job at education.
Opinion
The state and district P1460 PUPIL
attorneys argued that the ATTENDANCE
state had an overriding
interest to oversee and WPS BOARD
control the providers of POLICY:
education to the children of
Regular school
Oregon. One of them even
attendance is
went so far as to call
required of all
Oregonian students "the
pupils enrolled in
State's children". They
elementary and
contended that the State's
secondary schools
interest in overseeing the
under the Kansas
education of citizens and
compulsory
future voters was so great
attendance statue
that it overrode the parents'
(KSA § 72-1111).
right to choose a provider
The Kansas
of education for their child,
compulsory school
and the right of the child to
attendance law
influence the parent in this
makes parents
decision.
responsible for
requiring a child
under their control
or charge who is at
least seven (7) and
under eighteen (18)
years of age attend
school on a
continuous basis,
unless the child has
attained a high
school diploma or a
general educational
development (“GED”)
credential.

2. Discrimination Brown vs. Board 1954 Brown v. Board of
of Ed. Education of Topeka,
(1954), was a landmark
Missouri vs.
1969 decision of the United
Jenkins
States Supreme Court,
which overturned earlier
rulings going back to
Plessy v. Ferguson in 1896,
by declaring that state
laws which established
separate public schools
for black and white
students denied black
http://rajnarayansharma.com/matrix.htm
I guess the main argument
was was based on separate
but equal, the idea that
segregation based on
classifications was legal as
long as facilities were of
equal quality.
P6812
EQUITY/MULTICULTURAL
EDUCATION
WPS BOARD POLICY:
The population of the
Wichita Public Schools is
comprised of a variety of
ethnic, cultural, religious,
and racial groups.
Individual classrooms, as
well as schools, reflect this
1/13
9/5/2010 Case Law Matrix
students denied black
children equal educational
opportunities. This victory
paved the way for
integration and the Civil
Rights Movement.
Missouri v. Jenkins,
(1995), is a case decided
by the United States
Supreme Court. On June
12, 1995 the Court
overturned a District
Court ruling that required
the state of Missouri to
correct the racial
inequality in schools by
funding salary increases
and remedial education
programs
3. School prayer Engels vs. Vitale 1962 US Supreme Court
and decision of 1962 dealing
with the constitutionality
Lee vs. Weisman of prayer in public
1992
schools. The case was
brought against the New
York Board of Regents for
instituting an official
daily prayer in the state's
public schools. The Court
ordered the regents to
terminate the program,
ruling that the government
should not involve itself in
the creation of any
official religious practice,
sectarian or not.
The U.S. Supreme Court
held that "Including
clergy who offer prayers
as part of an official
public school graduation
ceremony is forbidden by
the Establishment Clause.
http://rajnarayansharma.com/matrix.htm
diverse population. It is the
responsibility of school
staffs, working with
Curriculum & Assessment
Design and other district
personnel, to help children
and adults learn to
appreciate the individual
differences and similarities
of these populations while
at the same time ensuring
equal treatment for all.
I believe one of the main P1501 FIRST AMENDMENT
arguments could be the RELIGIOUS
religious rights of students RIGHTS
and their right to freedom
WPS BOARD POLICY:
of conscience do not stop at
the schoolhouse door.
Unified School District No.
259 teachers must
recognize pupils’ First
Amendment religious rights.
The United States
Constitution’s First
Amendment imposes two
equally important
obligations on public
schools. First, schools must
In this case, Petitioners' not forbid pupils acting on
argument that the option of their own from expressing
not attending the ceremony their personal religious
excuses any inducement or views or beliefs. Second,
coercion in the ceremony schools may not endorse
itself is rejected. In this religious activity or doctrine
society, high school and pupils may not coerce
graduation is one of life's participation in religious
most significant occasions, activity. Schools must give
and a student is not free to pupils the same rights to
absent herself from the engage in religious activity
exercise in any real sense and discussion as they have
of the term 'voluntary'. to engage in other
comparable activity.
Generally, this means that
pupils may pray in a non-
disruptive manner during the
school day when they are
not engaged in school
activity and instruction,
subject to the same rules as
apply to other speech.
Notwithstanding anything to
the contrary in this policy or
other District policies,
participation in
constitutionally protected
prayer in elementary or
2/13
9/5/2010 Case Law Matrix
4. Civil rights Civil Rights 1964 The comprehensive U.S.
Legislation of legislation intended to end
1964 discrimination based on
race, color, religion, or
national origin; it is often
called the most important
U.S. law on civil rights
since Reconstruction
(1865–77). Title I of the
act guarantees equal
voting rights by removing
registration requirements
and procedures biased
against minorities and the
underprivileged.
5. Teacher rights Pickering vs. 1968 Pickering v. Board of
Board of Education , (1968),was a
Education case in which the Supreme
Court of the United States
held that in the absence
of proof of the teacher
knowingly or recklessly
making false statements
the teacher had a right to
speak on issues of public
importance without being
dismissed from his
position.
http://rajnarayansharma.com/matrix.htm
The school board
terminated the teacher,
saying that the letter
contained false statements
that impugned the integrity
of the school system. The
teacher sued, claiming that
the board violated his First
Amendment rights by
terminating him for
exercising his right to
freedom of speech.
secondary schools shall be
allowed.
P0910 CIVIL RIGHTS
RESOLUTION
WPS BOARD POLICY:
The Board of Education
hereby agrees to comply
with Title IV and Title VI
of the Civil Rights Act of
1964, as amended, and all
requirements imposed by or
pursuant to the regulations
of the Department of
Education. The Board of
Education further agrees to
the regulation that no
person in the United States
(on the grounds of race,
color, age, religion, sex,
national origin, or handicap)
shall be excluded from any
participation in, denied the
benefit of, or otherwise
subjected to discrimination
under any program, activity,
or employment with Unified
School District 259.
P1170 RULES OF ETHICAL
CONDUCT– EMPLOYEES
WPS BOARD POLICY:
The Board of Education
recognizes that rules of
ethical conduct for district
employees must be observed
if public confidence is to be
maintained in the school
district. It is the intent of
this policy to protect the
public trust placed in
district employees.
Employees are prohibited
from engaging in any
activity that would
constitute a violation of this
policy.
P4025 EQUAL
OPPORTUNITY
EMPLOYMENT
WPS BOARD POLICY:
Employment for each
specific vacancy shall be
offered to the individual
judged best qualified for
the position with no
discrimination with regard
to race, color, religion, sex,
national origin, or age, or
persons with disabilities. In
meeting staffing needs, the
3/13
9/5/2010 Case Law Matrix
administration shall strive to
maintain an equitable
balance of employees in the
various general categories
of positions with regard to
race, age, sex, and national
origin.

Tinker vs. Des 1969 According to court, - Interfere in school P1849 PUPIL RIGHTS AND
Moines ISD wearing of symbols like business PARENTAL
the armbands cannot be INVOLVEMENT
prohibited unless it - Discipline Issues
6. Student Rights
"materially and WPS BOARD POLICY:
- regulation was
substantially interferes
within the Board's Instructional materials,
with the requirements of
power including teachers’ manuals,
appropriate discipline in
films, tapes, or other
the operation of the - get negative supplementary material which
school." Result attention for will be used in connection
students with a pupil’s educational
1. In wearing armbands,
the petitioners were quiet program shall be available
and passive. They were for inspection by the lawful
not disruptive and did not custodian.
impinge upon the rights of
Personal information from a
others. In these
pupil in the specific areas
circumstances, their
listed in AIP #1 and the plan
conduct was within the
for subsequent analysis and
protection of the Free
evaluation of that personal
Speech Clause of the First
information shall be
Amendment and the Due
available for inspection by
Process Clause of the
the lawful custodian. Active
Fourteenth.
written consent of the lawful
2. First Amendment rights custodian is required prior to
are available to teachers participation by the pupil.
and students, subject to
application in light of the
special characteristics of
the school environment.

3. A prohibition against
expression of opinion,
without any evidence that
the rule is necessary to
avoid substantial
interference with school
discipline or the rights of
others, is not permissible
under the First and
Fourteenth Amendments.

7. Religion Lemon vs. 1971 For a law to be
Kurtzman considered constitutional
under the Establishment
Clause of the First
Amendment, the law must
have a legitimate secular
purpose, must not have the
primary effect of either
advancing or inhibiting
religion, and must not
result in an excessive
entanglement of
government and religion.
- Pennsylvania's 1968 P1502 USE OF RELIGIOUS
Nonpublic MATERIALS IN SCHOOLS
Elementary and
Secondary WPS BOARD POLICY:
Education Act and
Educational activities are
law is constitutional
provided which develop
respect for different
religions, ethnic groups, and
the inherent worth of the
individual. Moral training by
precept and example is
encouraged. Religious
education or observance is

http://rajnarayansharma.com/matrix.htm 4/13
9/5/2010 Case Law Matrix
not a function of the school.

8. Gender equity Title IX 1972 Title IX of the - P1119 HARASSMENT OF

Education Education Amendments PUPILS BASED ON
Amendment of of 1972, now known as RACE, COLOR,
1972 the Patsy T. Mink Equal RELIGION, GENDER,
Opportunity in Education NATIONAL ORIGIN,
Act in honor of its OR DISABILITY
principal author, but more
WPS BOARD POLICY:
commonly known simply as
Title IX, is a 37-word USD #259 will not tolerate
United States law enacted harassment or intimidation of
on June 23, 1972 that a pupil based on race, color,
states: "No person in the religion, gender, national
United States shall, on the origin, or disability by
basis of gender, be another pupil, employee or
excluded from others. Pupils and employees
participation in, be denied who violate this policy shall,
the benefits of, or be after proper investigation,
subjected to be subject to sanctions
discrimination under any including possible suspension
education program or and/or expulsion of the pupil
activity receiving Federal and termination of the
financial assistance." employee. Others who violate
this policy shall be reported
to local law enforcement
agencies for investigation.
Administrators who fail to
follow the policy or fail to
investigate complaints shall
also be disciplined.

9. Accommodations Rehabilitation Act 1973 A civil rights law to The schools will give priority
of 1973 (Section prohibit discrimination to serving pupils whose
504) Americans solely on the basis of special needs require
w/ Disabilities disability in employment, programs presently
Act public services, and mandated, and to pupils
accommodations. whose needs are most severe.
Schools will provide
1991 Who Is Protected?--Any reasonable accommodation in
individual with a disability all settings to pupils with
who: (1) has a physical or identified disabilities.
mental impairment that
substantially limits one or
more life activities; or (2)
has a record of such an
impairment; or (3) is
regarded as having such
an impairment. Further,
the person must be
qualified for the program,
service, or job.

10. Student’s due Goss vs. Lopez 1975 The U.S. Supreme Court - Disruption in school P5403 DUE PROCESS AND
process established that students routine PROCEDURES
are entitled to due RELATED TO
process prior to - complexity of ACCESS TO AND
suspension or expulsion. schools DENIAL OF

http://rajnarayansharma.com/matrix.htm 5/13
9/5/2010 Case Law Matrix
Due process proceedings
should occur before
suspension or expulsion,
except when a student is
an immediate danger to
himself or others. At a
minimum, students must be
told of the charges
against them and given an
opportunity to respond to
the charges. The court
ruled that the amount of
due process afforded to a
student should be
commensurate with the
potential penalty to be
imposed.
The Supreme Court
decided that students who
are suspended for 10 days
or less are entitled to
certain rights before their
suspension. These rights
include: (1) oral or written
notice of the charges, (2)
an explanation (if
students deny the
charges) of the evidence
against them, and (3) an
opportunity for students
to present their side of
the story.
11. Book banning Board of 1982 Local school boards may
Education vs. Pico not remove books from
school libraries simply
because they dislike the
ideas contained in those
books and seek by their
removal to "prescribe
what shall be orthodox in
politics, nationalism,
religion, or other matters
of opinion”.
The 1st Amendment limits
the power of local school
boards to remove library
books from junior high
schools and high schools.
http://rajnarayansharma.com/matrix.htm
SPECIAL
- and the difficult
EDUCATION
task of school
SERVICES
administrators
WPS BOARD POLICY:
- Section 3313.66 of
the Code empowers The authority to (1) exclude,
the principal of an reassign, or transfer a pupil
Ohio public school from a regular school class
to suspend a pupil on the grounds that the pupil
for misconduct for is an exceptional pupil and
up to 10 days or to cannot benefit materially
expel him. therefrom, or (2) place a
pupil in, transfer to or from,
or deny placement in special
education services, are
subject to the exercise of
due process rights, is
delegated to appointed
administrative personnel by
the Board of Education in
accordance with applicable
state statutes.
The schools in Unified
School District 259 are not
required to keep an
exceptional pupil in regular
school programs or to
provide such pupil with
special education services
when it is determined, in
accordance with due process
procedures, that the
education of such pupil
cannot be satisfactorily
achieved thereby and that
such pupil requires housing,
maintenance, and special
education provided at a state
institution or private
contract facility. The
district, however, remains
responsible for the
education of each
exceptional pupil as long as
the lawful custodian resides
within the USD 259
boundaries
- May affect the Wichita public schools do not
school environment have any specific rule in
order to comply with the
- Ethical issues particular citation.
- Book’s content are
not related to school
- Local Board of
education discretion
6/13
9/5/2010 Case Law Matrix

Board of 1982 (1) Education for All - Education for all P5427 CLASS
Education vs. Handicapped Children Handicapped
SIZE/CASELOAD
Rowley Act's requirement of a children act
"free appropriate public STANDARDS FOR
12. Special education
education" is satisfied - Free and SPECIAL EDUCATION
when state provides appropriate
personalized instruction education WPS BOARD POLICY:
with sufficient support
- Appropriate Federal law requires states
services to permit the
accommodation for to monitor class-size and
handicapped child to
being successful in caseloads for special
benefit educationally
environment education personnel. The
from that instruction; (2)
Kansas State Department of
Education for All
Education requirement is for
Handicapped Children
local districts to develop
Act's requirement of a
class-size/caseload
"free appropriate public
procedures that will ensure a
education" did not require
Free Appropriate Public
state to maximize potential
Education for exceptional
of each handicapped child
students.
commensurate with
opportunity provided
nonhandicapped children;
and (3) in light of finding I guess in all high school
that deaf child, who they have bigger class sizes
performed better than in interrelated classroom and
average child in her class it is a violation of the Law.
and was advancing easily
from grade to grade, was
receiving personalized
instruction and related
services calculated by
school administrators to
meet her educational
needs, Act did not require
provision of a
sign‑language interpreter
for the deaf child.

13. Search and New Jersey vs. 1985 The New Jersey Court
Seizure TLO relied on Supreme Court
of the United States
precedent to hold that
whenever an "official"
search violates
constitutional rights, the
evidence may not be used
in a criminal case.
Furthermore, the Supreme
Court of New Jersey
found that Choplick's
search was not
reasonable. Mere
possession of cigarettes
was not a violation of
school rules; therefore, a
desire for evidence of
smoking in the restroom
- The Fourth Amendment
applied to searches by
school officials, but that
the search in question was a
reasonable one.
P1469 SEARCH AND
SEIZURE - SCHOOL
FACILITIES
WPS BOARD POLICY:
The pupil has exclusive
control over his/her locker,
desk, work station, and other
similar assigned areas of
school property as against
other pupils; but such
possession is not exclusive as
against the school and its
officials. When a suspicion
arises that a pupil is involved

http://rajnarayansharma.com/matrix.htm 7/13
9/5/2010 smokingCase
in theLaw Matrix
restroom
did not justify the search.
In addition, the further
search of the purse was
not justified by the
presence of cigarette
rolling papers.
14. Student rights Bethel SD vs. 1986 The First Amendment, as
Frazier applied through the
Fourteenth, permits a
public school to punish a
student for giving a lewd
and indecent, but not
obscene, speech at a
school assembly. Ninth
Circuit reversed and
remanded. Finally, it was
decided that school
district's policy did not
violate the First
Amendment.
15. Teacher rights O’Conner vs. 1987 Searches and seizures by
Ortega government employers or
supervisors of the private
property of their
employees are subject to
Fourth Amendment
restraints. In the decision,
the Court of Appeals
concluded that respondent
had a reasonable
expectation of privacy in
his office, and that the
search violated the Fourth
Amendment.
16. Testing and Debra P. vs. 1979 In the landmark Debra P. v.
Graduation Turlington Turlington case, African-
American students who
had failed a statewide test
http://rajnarayansharma.com/matrix.htm
- Violation of his First
Amendment right to free
speech
- Search was proper
because there was a need to
secure state property in the
office.
- Same graduation
test for everybody
- Equal opportunity to
pass the test
in illegal, illicit, or disruptive
behavior, the principal has
the authority to conduct a
search and confiscate items
considered illegal, illicit,
disruptive, or a general
nuisance to the educational
process.
P1849 PUPIL RIGHTS AND
PARENTAL
INVOLVEMENT
WPS BOARD POLICY:
Instructional materials,
including teachers’ manuals,
films, tapes, or other
supplementary material which
will be used in connection
with a pupil’s educational
program shall be available
for inspection by the lawful
custodian.
Personal information from a
pupil in the specific areas
listed in AIP #1 and the plan
for subsequent analysis and
evaluation of that personal
information shall be
available for inspection by
the lawful custodian. Active
written consent of the lawful
custodian is required prior to
participation by the pupil.
P1470 SEARCH AND
SEIZURE - PUPILS
AND THEIR
PERSONAL
POSSESSIONS
WPS BOARD POLICY:
The pupil has exclusive
control over property in
his/her immediate possession
as against other pupils; but
such possession may not be
exclusive against the school
and its officials. When a
reasonable suspicion arises
that use or possession of a
pupil’s property is illegal,
illicit, disruptive, or a danger
to the general welfare of
pupils and staff, a search
may be made of the pupil’s
person or personal property.
Wichita public school doesn’t
have testing requirement
though some school require
senior projects.
8/13
9/5/2010 Case Law Matrix
required for a diploma in pass the test
Florida challenged the
testing requirement as
racially based, given to
affected students without
adequate notice, and
designed to resegregate
African-American students
into remedial classes. The
Florida high school
graduation test was a
multiple-choice test of
basic communication and
mathematics skills applied
to real-life situations. In
1979, after the test had
been administered three
times, approximately 2
percent of the white
seniors had not passed,
compared to approximately
20 percent of the African-
American seniors.

The Debra P. case

established two major
requirements for diploma
sanction testing: adequate
notice and curricular
validity. Adequate notice
requires that students be
told what a graduation test
will cover several years
before the test is
implemented. Curricular
validity means that the
schools are teaching what
is being tested; under
Debra P., the state must
collect data to
demonstrate curricular
validity.

17. Censorship Hazelwood SD vs. 1988 Believing that there was
Kuhlemeier no time to make necessary
changes in the articles if
the paper was to be issued
before the end of the
school year, the principal
directed that the pages on
which they appeared be
withheld from publication
even though other,
unobjectionable articles
were included on such
pages. The District Court
held that no First
Amendment violation had
occurred. The Court of
Appeals reversed.
- freedom of speech or P2120 DISTRIBUTION OF
expression at the PUBLISHED MATERIAL ON
schoolhouse gate PUBLIC SCHOOL GROUNDS
WPS BOARD POLICY:
Principals shall be
responsible for all materials
distributed at schools. In
general, the principal may
refuse to permit the sale
and/or distribution of any
literature which seeks to sell
commercial products for the
gain of outside interests;
seeks to promote a cause that
would disrupt a school’s
academic program or the
established rules of the
school; seeks under the guise
of "Freedom of Speech" to
ridicule or embarrass faculty
members, administrators, or
members of the student
body; or seeks to violate the

http://rajnarayansharma.com/matrix.htm 9/13
9/5/2010 Case Law Matrix
18. Special Education IDEA 1997 IDEA is our nation's
special education law.
IDEA stands for
Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act.
The IDEA was originally
enacted by Congress in
1975 to make sure that
children with disabilities
had the opportunity to
receive a free appropriate
public education, just like
other children. The law
has been revised many
times over the years. The
most recent amendments
were passed by Congress
in December 2004, with
final regulations published
in August 2006. So, in
some senses, the law is
very new, even as it has a
long, detailed, and
powerful history.
19. Church and State Agostini vs. Felton 1997 According to the court in
Agostini v. Felton case,
Title I instructional
services may be provided
by public school
employees in private
schools without violating
the Establishment Clause.
19. (Peer and Adult) Monroe vs. 1999 Petitioner seeking
Sexual Harassment Davis damages for the sexual
harassment of her
daughter LaShonda by
G. F., a fifth-grade
classmate at a public
elementary school.
Among other things,
petitioner alleged that
respondents’ deliberate
indifference to G. F.’s
persistent sexual
http://rajnarayansharma.com/matrix.htm
By allowing public school
employees in private
schools, the Court expressly
overruled its 1985 decision
in Aguilar v. Felton (1985).
I guess temptation of
inculcating religion in public
school may be a negative
effect and it was one of the
biggest argument in the
case.
- Violation of Title IX of
the Education Amendments
of 1972
principles contained in the
Statement of Freedom of the
High School Press
(Journalism Educational
Association, 1974).
P5400 GENERAL POLICIES
FOR SPECIAL
EDUCATION
WPS BOARD POLICY:
Unified School District 259
will provide special
education programs to
identify and serve
exceptional pupils in
accordance with current
state statutes and
regulations.
There have recently been a
number of cases involving the
issues of vouchers and public
funding of parochial (private
religious) schools and the
Supreme Court's decision in
Agostini vs. Felton (see
above) was widely regarded
as creating a more favorable
climate for increased public
support of parochial schools
P1116 SEXUAL HARASSMENT
OF PUPILS
WPS BOARD POLICY:
USD 259 will not tolerate
sexual harassment of a pupil
by another pupil, employee, or
others. Violation of this policy
shall result in disciplinary
action against any pupil or
employee involved, including
10/13
9/5/2010 Case Law Matrix
persistent sexual
possible expulsion of the
advances toward
pupil and termination of the
LaShonda created an
employee. Others who violate
intimidating, hostile,
this policy shall be reported
offensive, and abusive
to local law enforcement
school environment that
authorities for appropriate
violated Title IX of the
action and may be prohibited
Education Amendments
from being on school property
of 1972, which, in
and/or attending school
relevant part, prohibits
activities. Administrators who
a student from being
fail to follow the policy or
“excluded from
fail to investigate complaints
participation in, be[ing]
shall also be disciplined.
denied the benefits of,
or be[ing] subjected to
discrimination under
any education program
or activity receiving
Federal financial
assistance,”. In
granting respondents’
motion to dismiss, the
Federal District Court
found that “student-on-
student,” or peer,
harassment provides no
ground for a Title IX
private cause of action
for damages.

20. Teacher Rights Merrick vs. Rio 1999 A school district - Mistreatment of teacher Wichita public school have
(sexual orientation) Bravo-Greeley illegally bowed to ethical standard for all staffs
Union School parents' but there is nothing in
District requests to remove 15 particular about Sexual
pupils from the orientation.
classroom of a
purportedly gay
teacher, a state
official said and
ordered the youngsters
returned to
his class. By granting
the requests, the
district wrongfully
fostered
different treatment
toward the eight-grade
science teacher based
"upon (his) perceived
sexual orientation,
ruling requires the Rio
Bravo-Greeley Union
School District to
return
the pupils to the
classroom of James D.
Merrick, a former
teacher of
the year in Bakersfield.
Merrick, a teacher for
40 years, was hired
by the district in 1994.
He has neither said he
is gay nor denied it.

http://rajnarayansharma.com/matrix.htm 11/13
9/5/2010 Case Law Matrix
21. School prayer at Santa Fe ISD 2000 - Free speech right P1502 USE OF RELIGIOUS
football games vs. Doe MATERIALS IN SCHOOLS
The District's policy - Religious right
permitting student-led, WPS BOARD POLICY:
student-initiated
prayer at football Educational activities are
games violates the provided which develop
Establishment Clause. respect for different
religions, ethnic groups, and
the inherent worth of the
individual. Moral training by
precept and example is
encouraged. Religious
education or observance is not
a function of the school.

22. IEP’s Amanda C. v. 2001 The court found that - procedural issues P5402 PROVISION OF LEAST
Clark Co Sch. the school district mis- RESTRICTIVE
Dist. & Nevada identified Amanda as - The district ENVIRONMENT FOR
Dept. of Ed. developmentally provided DISABLED PUPILS
delayed. The court also appropriate support
found that Clark WPS BOARD POLICY:
County violated the
Provision for pupils identified
parent’s rights. The
as disabled will be made to
school psychologist did
ensure the pupil is in an
not inform the parents
environment that allows
that their child had
appropriate placement
characteristics of
compatible with the pupil’s
autism. The school
abilities.
district failed to
provide the parents
with copies of their
child’s evaluations.
Amanda did not begin
to receive an in-home
intervention program
until April, 1996.
23. Privacy Falvo vs. 2002 Ruling for the school - Call out the grades does
In accordance with the Kansas
Owasso ISD district, the Supreme violate the Family
Open Records Act (K.S.A. § 45-
Court held that Educational Rights and
215, et seq.), school district
allowing students to Privacy Act of 1974
records shall be open for
score each other's (FERPA).
inspection by any person,
tests and call out the
except as otherwise provided
grades does not violate
by law.
the Family Educational
Rights and Privacy Act Personal information from a
of 1974 (FERPA). pupil in the specific areas
listed in AIP #1 and the plan
for subsequent analysis and
evaluation of that personal
information shall be available
for inspection by the lawful
custodian. Active written
consent of the lawful
custodian is required prior to
participation by the pupil.

24. Vouchers Zelman v. 2002 The Supreme Court - Violation of Establishment Wichita Public school doesn’t
Simmons- ruled that the Ohio Clause of the First have any section about
Harris, et.al. program did not violate Amendment vouchers.
the Establishment
Clause of the First
Amendment to the
United States
Constitution, because it
passed a five part test
developed by the Court

http://rajnarayansharma.com/matrix.htm 12/13
9/5/2010 Case Law Matrix
in this case, titled the
Private Choice

http://rajnarayansharma.com/matrix.htm 13/13