Muth v. Smith
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
HUYETT, District Judge.
Presently pending before me in this action, based ón the Education For All Handicapped Children Act (EAHCA), 20 U.S.C. § 1401 et seq., is plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment. By order dated November 18, 1985, I granted plaintiff leave to file a second amended complaint to raise certain issues which prior counsel had omitted including the issue of whether Pennsylvania’s administrative procedure used to determine the appropriate education for a handicapped minor, complies with the dictates of the federal EAHCA. Plaintiff has now moved for…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Helms v. McDanielCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1981
- Victoria L. v. District School Board Of Lee County, FloridaCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1984
- Vogel v. School Board of Montrose R-14 School DistrictDistrict Court, W.D. Missouri · 1980
- Grymes v. MaddenCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1982
- Brandon E. v. Wisconsin Department of Public InstructionDistrict Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 1984
3Cited by8 opinions
- Muth v. Central Bucks School DistrictCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1988
- Johnson v. Lancaster-Lebanon Intermediate Unit 13District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1991
- Puffer v. RaynoldsDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1990
- DeVries ex rel. DeBlaay v. SpillaneCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1988
- Devries v. SpillaneCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1988
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.