Legal Opinion
Medford v. District of Columbia
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided July 13, 1988No. Civ. A. 87-1949, 88-0023PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Memorandum Opinion and Order
SPORKIN, District Judge.
Plaintiffs in these two eases seek to collect attorneys’ fees and other costs incurred in bringing successful administrative actions under the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (“EHA”), 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq.
Defendants interpose two basic legal defenses. They contend attorneys’ fees should not be available for administrative proceedings. They also contend that the Act should not apply retroactively. In addition, defendants object to plaintiffs’ designation of these cases as related to other cases pending before me.
Defendants also…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Hensley v. EckerhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Brown v. Board of EducationSupreme Court of the United States · 1954
- Board of Education of the Hendrick Hudson Central School District v. Rowley Ex Rel. RowleySupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Honig v. DoeSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Maher v. GagneSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Bush Ex Rel. A.H. v. District of ColumbiaDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2008
- Williams v. Boston School CommitteeDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1989
- Collins v. Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp.District Court, District of Columbia · 1989