Cases

ORDER Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint (ECF No. 9) Richard F. Boulware, II United States District Judge I. INTRODUCTION Before the Court is a Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendant Clark County School District (“District”) (ECF No. 9). The Court has reviewed the parties’ papers and heard, oral argument. For the reasons discussed below, Defendant

348 S.C. 420 (2001) 559 S.E.2d 362 CHARLESTON COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT, Respondent, v. LAIDLAW TRANSIT, INC. and South Carolina Department of Education, Of Whom Laidlaw Transit, Inc. is the, Appellant. No. 3429. Court of Appeals of South Carolina. Heard September 4, 2001. Decided December 31, 2001. Rehearing Denied Feb

Opinion by Judge MICHAEL DALY HAWKINS; Dissent by Judge THOMAS. MICHAEL DALY HAWKINS, Circuit Judge: Public school districts across the country have increasingly turned to the adoption of mandatory dress policies, sometimes referred to as “school uniform policies,” in an effort to focus student attention and reduce conflict. These policies are not without controversy, and many students, as well as their pa

168 P.3d 87 (2007) CLARK COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT, Appellant, v. RICHARDSON CONSTRUCTION, INC., A Nevada Corporation, Respondent. No. 40976. Supreme Court of Nevada. October 4, 2007. *89 Lewis & Roca, LLP, and Daniel F. Polsenberg and Heidi J. Parry Stern, Las Vegas; Kolesar & Leatham, Chtd., and Alan J. Lefebvre, Las Vegas

*737Opinion and Order CAMERON MCGOWAN CURRIE, Senior United States District Judge Through this action, Plaintiff Deborah Clark (“Plaintiff’) seeks recovery from her former employer, School District Five of Lexington and Richland Counties (“District”), claiming her employer failed to provide a reasonable accommodation for her disability in violation of

ARNOLD, Circuit Judge, concurring in part and dissenting in part. I. I agree with much of the Court’s able opinion. In particular, I approve completely of its decision not to order consolidation of the three school districts now operating in Pulaski County, Arkansas. Consolidation would mean destruction of three popularly governed units of local government,

ORDER TIMOTHY C. BATTEN, Senior District Judge. This case is before the Court on Plaintiff Charles Flowers’s objections to the magis*1366trate judge’s report and recommendation [147]. The magistrate judge recommends granting the School District Defendants’1 motion for summary judgment on Flowers’s race-di

FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 9 2022 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS LARISSA WALN; BRYAN WALN, No. 21-15737 Plaintiffs-Appellants,

584 F.Supp. 328 (1984) LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, Plaintiff, v. PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1; North Little Rock School District; Arkansas State Board of Education; Wayne Hartsfield; Walter Turnbow; Harry A. Haines; Jim Dupree; Dr. Harry P. McDonald; Robert L. Newton; Alice L. Preston; Jeff Starling; Earle Love; Bob Lyon; John Ward; Judy Wear; Leon Barnes; Marianne Gosser; Steve Morley; Mac Faulkner; Bob Moore; Don Hindman; Shirl

ORDER Amy Totenberg, United States District Judge Alex Williams is a young man with disabilities who was born with hydrocephalus, hemiparesis, cerebral palsy, moderate to severe intellectual disabilities, motor and language impairment, and who has a history of seizures. (Compl. ¶ l.)1 Alex allegedly suffered horrific abuse at the hands of his special education teacher, Mela

BEA, Circuit Judge, concurring in part and dissenting in part: I concur in the court’s disposition of Appellants’ claims under the IDEA. However, because I do not think the IDEA’S exhaustion requirements bar the plaintiffs from pursuing their claims under § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, I respectfully dissent from the court’s holding the district court lacked jurisdiction to he

2022 WI 65 SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN CASE NO.: 2020AP1032 COMPLETE TITLE: John Doe 1, Jane Doe 1, Jane Doe 3 and Jane Doe 4, Plaintiffs-Appellants-Petitioners, John Doe 5 and Jane Doe 5, Plaintiffs-Appellants, John Doe 6, Jane Doe 6, John Doe

JUSTICE COOK delivered the opinion of the court: Defendant Regional School Trustees for Clark, Coles, Cumberland, Edgar, Moultrie and Shelby Counties (local regional board) approved the petition of defendant Dale Elvers for the detachment and annexation of his property, pursuant to provisions of the School Code (Code) (105 ILCS 5/1 — 1 et seq. (West 1992)). The circuit court

OPINION * Mark R. Hornak,- United States District Judge The three high' school student Plaintiffs are each transgender, and all are in their senior year at Pine-Richland (Pa.) High School (“High School”). ECF 43 at ¶ 15. Two of them, Juliet Evancho and Elissa Ridenour, each over eighteen years old, had “male” listed on their birth certificates when they were born.

FILED: August 30, 2021 PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT ___________________ No. 19-2203 (1:18-cv-00614-LO-MSN) ___________________ JANE DOE, Plaintiff

470 F.Supp.2d 963 (2004) LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Plaintiff v. PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al. Defendants Mrs. Lorene JOSHUA, et al. Intervenors Katherine KNIGHT, et al. Intervenors No. 4:82CV00866 WRWJTR. United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Western Division. June 30, 2004. Philip E. Kaplan, Kaplan, Brewer, Maxey & Harals

ORDER PHILIP M. PRO, District Judge. Before the Court are Defendant Catherine Cortez-Masto’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 10), and Defendants Clark County, Diana Alba, and David Rogers’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 15). *1136I. BACKGROUND This is a civil rights action challenging the constitutionalit

OPINION & ORDER KATHERINE B. FORREST, United States District Judge KATHERINE B, FORREST, District. Judge: *604Plaintiff Adam Heller (“Heller” or “plaintiff’), a former public high school English teacher, brought this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging numerous claims arising under the First, Second, Fourth and Fourteenth

USCA11 Case: 23-10385 Document: 112-1 Date Filed: 03/12/2025 Page: 1 of 169 [PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 23-10385 ____________________ JANUARY LITTLEJOHN, JEFFREY LITTL

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER JAMES 0. BROWNING, District Judge. THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the Defendant’s [sic] Motion to Dismiss and for Qualified Immunity, filed January 12, 2014 (Doc. 8)(“Motion”). The Court held a hearing on April 8, 2015. The primary issues are: (i) whether Plaintiff Peggy Saenz sufficiently alleges that the Defendants created the danger that harmed her daughte