Legal Opinion
Knight v. District of Columbia
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided August 23, 1988No. Civ. A. 87-2581PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
CHARLES R. RICHEY, District Judge.
INTRODUCTION
Under the Education of the Handicapped Act, 20 U.S.C. §§ 1400 — 1461, the District of Columbia is required to provide a “free, appropriate public education” to all handicapped children within its jurisdiction. Id. at § 1400(c). This education must emphasize special education and related services and must be tailored to meet the unique needs of each handicapped child. Id,.; see also, e.g., McKenzie v. Smith, 771 F.2d 1527 (D.C.Cir.1985). As a means to this end, the District of Columbia is required to develop an Individualized Educational Program…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- 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
- School Committee of the Town of Burlington v. Department of EducationSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Floretta McKenzie Superintendent, D.C. Public Schools v. Christopher Smith, by His ParentsCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1985
3Cited by1 opinion
- Stephen Andrew Knight, by His Parent and Next Friend, Nettie Knight v. District of Columbia, a Municipal CorporationCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1989