Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part
Irvine Unified School District v. K. G.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided April 13, 2017No. 14-56457Published
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partCallahan, Circuit Judge
I join all of Judge O’Scannlain’s opinion except for Section III C. I can find no justification in either the IDEA or case law for limiting an award of attorneys’ fees to a prevailing party based on when the student graduated. Rather, such a restriction fails to appreciate the IDEA and its carefully crafted provisions for attorneys’ fees.
The IDEA allows for attorneys’ fees, under certain conditions, for either the plaintiffs or defendants.1 The IDEA fur*1096ther contains provisions for insuring that the amount of attorneys’ fees is reasonable.2 Here, as the majority notes, it was the School…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Fry v. Napoleon Community SchoolsSupreme Court of the United States · 2017
- T.B. ex rel. Brenneise v. San Diego Unified School DistrictCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2015
- Farrar v. HobbySupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- City of Riverside v. RiveraSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Board of Education of the Hendrick Hudson Central School District v. Rowley Ex Rel. RowleySupreme Court of the United States · 1982
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.