Sentences with phrase «high school district v.»

At issue in «Anderson Union High School District v. Shasta Secondary Home School» was whether the charter school law permits an independent study charter authorized in one district to open a «resource center» to serve students living in other districts in the same county.

The following is a statement from the California Charter Schools Association on the California Supreme Court's decision to deny the petition for review filed by Shasta Secondary Home School appealing the decision of the California Court of Appeal in Anderson Union High School District v. Shasta Secondary Home School (Anderson Union HSD).

Not exact matches

My home is not thirty minutes away from Dover Area High School and even closer to the Federal District Court in Harrisburg where the Kitzmiller v. Dover trial took place in the fall of 2005.

The court rejected the school district's argument that the prayer meetings were an extension of the voluntary, «open forum» prayer meetings upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court last December in a higher - education case, Widmar v. Vincent.

Shortly after its ruling in Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe, the high court vacated a related ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit and told the Atlanta - based court to re-examine the issue in light of Santa Fe.

The Supreme Court's recent decision in Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, which authorizes educators to supervise the content of official high - school newspapers, is the Court's most significant ruling in a free - speech case involving public - school students since it decided Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District almost 20 yearSchool District v. Kuhlmeier, which authorizes educators to supervise the content of official high - school newspapers, is the Court's most significant ruling in a free - speech case involving public - school students since it decided Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District almost 20 yearschool newspapers, is the Court's most significant ruling in a free - speech case involving public - school students since it decided Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District almost 20 yearschool students since it decided Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District almost 20 yearSchool District almost 20 years ago.

The Third Circuit, in a case from Pennsylvania, ruled that officials violated the rights of a high school senior in suspending him for creating an internet parody of his principal on the social networking site MySpace (Layshock v. Hermitage School District, school senior in suspending him for creating an internet parody of his principal on the social networking site MySpace (Layshock v. Hermitage School District, School District, 2010).

In B.L. v. Mahanoy Area School District, a high school sophomore was kicked off the junior - varsity cheerleading squad for a vulgar image she sent via Snapchat, a messaging platform that is supposed to protect against rash juvenile behavior by deleting photos soon after one sendsSchool District, a high school sophomore was kicked off the junior - varsity cheerleading squad for a vulgar image she sent via Snapchat, a messaging platform that is supposed to protect against rash juvenile behavior by deleting photos soon after one sendsschool sophomore was kicked off the junior - varsity cheerleading squad for a vulgar image she sent via Snapchat, a messaging platform that is supposed to protect against rash juvenile behavior by deleting photos soon after one sends them.

«A Time for Sight: The Debate over Color Blindness and Race - Consciousness in School Integration Policy,» Curriculum Connections In light of the 2007 Supreme Court decision in Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District and Meredith v. Jefferson County Board of Education, ADL offers this comprehensive lesson that examines the debate over school integration within the broader context of the Court's Brown v. Board of Education decision in 1954 and the desegregation of Central High School in Little Rock, AK inSchool Integration Policy,» Curriculum Connections In light of the 2007 Supreme Court decision in Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District and Meredith v. Jefferson County Board of Education, ADL offers this comprehensive lesson that examines the debate over school integration within the broader context of the Court's Brown v. Board of Education decision in 1954 and the desegregation of Central High School in Little Rock, AK inSchool District and Meredith v. Jefferson County Board of Education, ADL offers this comprehensive lesson that examines the debate over school integration within the broader context of the Court's Brown v. Board of Education decision in 1954 and the desegregation of Central High School in Little Rock, AK inschool integration within the broader context of the Court's Brown v. Board of Education decision in 1954 and the desegregation of Central High School in Little Rock, AK inSchool in Little Rock, AK in 1957.

High expectations for students with unique needs An important case being heard by the U.S. Supreme Court on Jan 11, Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District, is being supported by civil rights groups and school choice advocates School District, is being supported by civil rights groups and school choice advocates school choice advocates alike.

about NSBA Amicus Brief - John M. v. Board of Education of Evanston Township High School District 202.

In Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of a higher standard of education for children with disabilities.

In a stunning 8 - 0 decision in the case Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of a higher standard of education for children with disabilities.

«The decision in Boone County Board of Education v. N.W., as it stands, would force cash - strapped school districts to bear the high costs of private placements during litigation, even when a court ultimately rules that the district has made FAPE available in a public school setting,» said NSBA General Counsel Francisco M. Negrón Jr. «The lower court's decision sets a terrible precedent that prolongs due process and court proceedings and discourages informal resolution of special education disputes through mediated settlement.

There are school districts with higher populations of the three Vincent v. Voight higher needs student groups whose disparity differs greatly from the mean, and even further from the upper quartiles.

This ranking was generated by combining school funding and spending capacity, adjusts for inflation over the 10 years of the study; then uses a formula to «equalize» districts based on high needs student rates (as defined in Vincent v. Voigt).

She is lead counsel on ACLU's education equity litigation, including lead counsel for Community Coalition v. Los Angeles Unified School District, a lawsuit seeking to compel LAUSD to provide the proper amount of funding and services to high - need students.

On Wednesday, more than 200 advocates gathered to celebrate the 20th anniversary of the NJ Supreme Court decision that ordered the state to implement «well - planned, high - quality» preschool for all 3 — and 4 - year - old children in the 31 school districts that were part of theAbbott v. Burke educational equity case.

She also was bound by the high court's 1992 decision in Mitchell v. Los Angeles Unified School District, which «rejected the notion that the only funds from nonunion members that a union constitutionally could use for political or ideological causes were those funds that the nonunion members affirmatively consented to pay.»

Just as importantly, the waiver gambit reaffirms the role of states in structuring education without holding them accountable for how they spend federal dollars (or for providing them with high - quality teaching, curricula, and school options); this includes the administration's move through the waiver process to bless implementation of Plessy v. Ferguson - like proficiency targets that allow districts and other school operators to effectively ignore poor and minority students.

The U.S. Supreme Court's unanimous March 2017 decision in Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District is holding school districts to a higher standard by requiring «appropriately ambitious» proSchool District is holding school districts to a higher standard by requiring «appropriately ambitious» proschool districts to a higher standard by requiring «appropriately ambitious» programs.

In June, California's Fourth District Court of Appeal ruled that a charter school student was not entitled to the evidentiary hearing required under Education Code section 48918 before being dismissed from a charter school for bringing a knife to school and threatening a fellow student (Scott B. v. Orange County High School of Arts 217 Cal.App.4 th 117 (Caschool student was not entitled to the evidentiary hearing required under Education Code section 48918 before being dismissed from a charter school for bringing a knife to school and threatening a fellow student (Scott B. v. Orange County High School of Arts 217 Cal.App.4 th 117 (Caschool for bringing a knife to school and threatening a fellow student (Scott B. v. Orange County High School of Arts 217 Cal.App.4 th 117 (Caschool and threatening a fellow student (Scott B. v. Orange County High School of Arts 217 Cal.App.4 th 117 (CaSchool of Arts 217 Cal.App.4 th 117 (Cal.App.

Conversely, the chances of an employer unintentionally violating the Human Rights Code are high and the potential liability can be significant, as was most recently evident to an employer that was ordered to pay an employee, among other things, approximately 9 years or $ 500,000 in lost wages and $ 30,000 in general damages for failing to accommodate her return from a disability leave: Fair v. Hamilton - Wentworth District School Board 2013 HRTO 440.