Legal Opinion
Wesleyann & Warren Gill v. District of Columbia
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided November 9, 2010No. Civil Action 09-1608 (RMC)PublishedCited by 25 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
ROSEMARY M. COLLYER, District Judge.
Wesleyann and Warren Gill are ardent advocates for their son, W.G., who qualifies for and is receiving special education and related services as a child with a disability. A Hearing Officer found that the District of Columbia denied W.G. a free appropriate public education (“FAPE”) in violation of the Individuals with Disabilities Improvement Education Act (“IDEIA”), 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq., because at least one of his teachers was not a certified special education teacher as his individualized education plan (“IEP”) requires and he had…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme 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
- Hecht Co. v. BowlesSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Florence County School District Four v. Carter Ex Rel. CarterSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- Brooks v. District of ColumbiaDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2012
- Lopez-Young v. District of ColumbiaDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2016
- Pavelko v. Dist. of ColumbiaCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2018
- District of Columbia v. PearsonDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2013
- United States v. Univar USA, Inc.United States Court of International Trade · 2016
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.