Cases
Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.
20 opinions for “JOHN DOE NO. 1 v. BETHEL LOCAL SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD OF EDUCATION”
Doe v. University of Massachusettspublic domain
United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 24-1458 JOHN DOE, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS; TRUSTEES FOR THE UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS; HANNAH MONBLEAU, in her official and individual capacities; KATE LEGEE, in her official and individual capacities; ESMERALDA LEVESQUE, in her official and individual capacities, a/k/a Esmeralda Mendez
Doe v. New Havenpublic domain
*********************************************** The “officially released” date that appears near the be- ginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be pub- lished in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it was released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the be- ginning of all time periods for filing postopinion motions and petitions for certification is the “officially released” date appearing in the opinion. All opinions are subject to modification and technical corr
Cole v. Maine School Administrative District No. 1public domain
350 F.Supp.2d 143 (2004) Gary COLE, Plaintiff, v. MAINE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATIVE DISTRICT NO. 1, Defendant. No. CIV. 03-205-B-W. United States District Court, D. Maine. December 3, 2004. *144 *145 Arthur J. Greif, Gilbert & Greif, P.A., Julie D. Farr, Gilbert & Greif, P.A., Bangor, ME, fo
Jane Doe v. Univ. of Ky.public domain
RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 24a0167p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ┐ JANE DOE, │ Plaintiff-Appellant, │
John Doe v. Pulaski School Dist.public domain
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ________________ No. 01-1048 ________________ John Doe, a minor, by his mother * and next friend, Jane Doe, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United
Doe v. Hopkinton Public Schoolspublic domain
United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 20-1950 JOHN DOE, by his Mother and Next Friend, JANE DOE; B.B., by his Mother and Next Friend, JANE BLOGGS, Plaintiffs, Appellants, v. HOPKINTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS, Defendant, Appellee, CAROL CAVANAUGH, in her individual capacity and official capacity as Superintendent of the Hopkinton Public
Fleming v. Jefferson County School District No. R-1public domain
170 F.Supp.2d 1094 (2001) Donald F. FLEMING, Deidra A. Fleming, Lisa M. Maurer, Brian E. Rohrbough, Susan A. Petrone, Richard P. Petrone (individually), and Nicole M. Petrone, a minor child, by and through her father and next friend Richard P. Petrone, Plaintiffs, v. JEFFERSON COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. R-1, a Colorado Quasi-Municipal Corporation, and Jon DeStefano, individually and in his official capacity, Defendants. No.
John Doe v. State of Hawaii Dept. of Educ.public domain
351 F.Supp.2d 998 (2004) John DOE, a Minor (born 01/28/90) By his Next Friend, Jane Doe, and Jane DOE, Individually, Plaintiffs, v. STATE OF HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION; Sonia Zane; David Keala; Herman Aizawa; Ralph Murakami; Maude Yamakawa; Department of Education of the State of Hawaii by and Through its Agent and/or Instrumentality A-Plus Program DBA A-Plus Program at Pukalani Elementary School, Defendants. Civ. No. 00
Westbrook v. Teton County School District No. 1public domain
918 F.Supp. 1475 (1996) Dr. Pamela J. WESTBROOK, Plaintiff, v. TETON COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1; Sarah J. Smith, Superintendent of Public Instruction, in her individual and official capacities, Defendants. No. 95-CV-0156-B. United States District Court, D. Wyoming. March 1, 1996. *1476 *1477
John Doe, a Minor, by His Mother and Next Friend, Jane Doe v. Pulaski County Special School Districtpublic domain
306 F.3d 616 John DOE, a minor, by his mother and next friend, Jane Doe, Appellee,v.PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, Appellant. No. 01-1048. United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit. Submitted: January 16, 2002. Filed: September 25, 2002. COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED Gregory T. Jones, argued, L
In the Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas at Fort Worth ___________________________ No. 02-24-00201-CV ___________________________ ARETHA HALL, Appellant V. MANSFIELD INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT AND DOES 1-10, Appellees On Appeal from the 96th District Court
Maya Arce v. John Huppenthalpublic domain
Opinion by Judge Rakoff; Partial Concurrence and Partial Dissent by Judge Clifton. OPINION RAKOFF, District Judge: The children of the Tucson Unified School District (“TUSD”), a majority of whom are of Mexican or other Hispanic descent, have a natural interest in knowing more about their cultural heritage and that of their community — or so the school board of Tucson decided, inaugurating
Requa v. Kent School District No. 415public domain
492 F.Supp.2d 1272 (2007) Gregory REQUA, Plaintiff(s), v. KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 415; Barbara Grohe, Superintendent; and Michael Albrecht, Principal, Defendant(s). No. C07-759MJP. United States District Court, W.D. Washington, at Seattle. May 24, 2007. *1273 Jeannette A. Cohen, Law Office of Jeannette A. Cohen, Shoreline, WA, f
WIENER, Circuit Judge: Plaintiffs-Appellants Jane Doe, June Doe, Janet Doe and Jill Doe (collectively “the Does” or “the Doe children”), by their next friends, Susan Doe, Mary Doe and Lisa Doe (collectively “the Doe Parents”)1 appeal the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Defendant-Appellee Beaumont Independent School District (“BISD”). The Does argue that the court erred in c
WIENER, Circuit Judge: In Jones v. Clear Creek Independent School District, 977 F.2d 963 (5th Cir.1992) 0Clear Creek II), we declared Clear- Creek’s policy of allowing a student-selected, student-given, nonsectarian, nonproselytizing invocation and benediction at high school graduations (“Clear Creek Prayer Policy”) not viola-tive of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Const
Doe v. Perry Community School Districtpublic domain
316 F.Supp.2d 809 (2004) John DOE, Plaintiff, v. PERRY COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT; Randy McCaulley, Individually and in his Official Capacity as Superintendent of Perry Community School District; Dan Marburger, Individually and in his Official Capacity as Principal of the Perry High School; Bob Gittens, Individually and in his Official Capacity as Associate Principal of the Perry High School; Jerry "Pat" Jans, Individually and in his Official Capa
Doe by and Through Doe v. Petaluma City School Dist.public domain
949 F.Supp. 1415 (1996) Jane DOE, a Minor, By and Through her Guardian ad Litem, John DOE, Plaintiff, v. PETALUMA CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT, and Petaluma Joint Union High School District, Richard Homrighouse, and Roes 1 through 50, Inclusive, Defendants. No. C 93-00123 CW. United States District Court, N.D. California. July 22, 1996. *1416</
Doe v. Smallpublic domain
934 F.2d 743 59 USLW 2752 Jane DOE, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.George D. SMALL, Mayor of the City of Ottawa, Illinois;Barbara J. Lindquist, William C. Ferguson, Alan R. Howarterand William N. Stevenson, Members of the City Council of theCity of Ottawa, Illinois; and the City of Ottawa, Illinois,a municipal corporation, Defendants,1The Ottawa Jaycees, Intervenor-Defendant-Appellant.
Doe v. Santa Fe Indep Schpublic domain
Revised March 17, 1999 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _____________________ No. 97-40150 _____________________ JANE DOE, Individually and as next of friend for her minor children, Jane and John Doe, Minor Children; JANE DOE #2, Individually and as next of friend for her minor child, John Doe, Minor Child, and John Doe, Individually,
Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doepublic domain
530 U.S. 290 (2000) SANTA FE INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT v. DOE, individually and as next friend for HER MINOR CHILDREN, et al. No. 99-62. United States Supreme Court. Argued March 29, 2000. Decided June 19, 2000. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT *291