In plaintiffs’ suit against a school district on behalf of their daughter who suffers from cognitive and developmental disorders alleging that the district’s failure to provide their daughter with appropriate eduction obstructed her intellectual growth, summary judgment for defendant favor is affirmed for the most part but a portion of its ruling is vacated and remanded where: 1) district court erred in determining that the plaintiffs do not have standing to pursue their Individuals with Disabilities Education Act claim; and 2) plaintiffs did not waive their right to proceed directly under the Rehabilitation Act and the ADA.
Read Chambers v. Sch. Dist. of Phiadelphia Bd. of Educ., No. 07-4790
Appellate Information
On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Opinion Filed November 20, 2009
Judges
Before: Barry, Fisher and Jordan, Circuit Judges
Opinion by Fisher, Circuit Judge
Counsel
Counsel for Appellant: David J. Berney
Counsel for Appellee: Richard G. Turttle, Archer & Greiner
You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help
Civil Rights
Block on Trump’s Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
Criminal
Judges Can Release Secret Grand Jury Records
Politicians Can’t Block Voters on Facebook, Court Rules
