Legal Opinion

LAMONT X v. Quisenberry

District Court, S.D. Ohio

Decided October 26, 1984No. Civ. A. C-1-84-1417PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

DAVID S. PORTER, Senior District Judge:

I. Facts

This case arises under the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (EAHCA), 20 U.S.C. § 1401 et seq. Now before the Court is plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction, pursuant to 20 U.S.C. § 1415(e)(3), prohibiting the defendants, the Hamilton, Ohio Board of Education and its administrators, from preventing plaintiffs Lamont and Del from returning to the classroom pending the outcome of certain statutory proceedings.

Del and Lamont are Severely Behaviorally Handicapped (“S.B.H.”) children who live at The Children’s…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Board of Education of the Hendrick Hudson Central School District v. Rowley Ex Rel. RowleySupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  2. Anderson v. ThompsonCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1981
  3. Mason County Medical Association v. KnebelCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1977
  4. S-1 v. TurlingtonCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1981
  5. John Doe v. Brookline School CommitteeCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1983

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Brimmer v. Traverse City Area Public SchoolsDistrict Court, W.D. Michigan · 1994
  2. Gillette Ex Rel. Gillette v. Fairland Board of EducationDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 1989
  3. Brookline School Committee v. GoldenDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1986
  4. Stancourt v. Worthington City School Dist., 07ap-835 (9-9-2008)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2008
  5. State ex rel. S.T.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1989

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API