Muller ex rel. Muller v. Committee on Special Education of the East Islip Union Free School District
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
CHIN, District Judge.
The principal issue in this case is whether Treena Muller (“Treena”), a minor, qualified for benefits tinder the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (the “IDEA”), 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq. (1994) (amended 1997),1 *98as a child with a “serious emotional disturbance.” Defendants-appellants Committee on Special Education of the East Islip Union Free School District and Board of Education of the East Islip Union Free School District (together, the “District”) determined that she did not qualify, and on administrative review, an Impartial Hearing Officer and a State Review…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Board of Education of the Hendrick Hudson Central School District v. Rowley Ex Rel. RowleySupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- School Committee of the Town of Burlington v. Department of EducationSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Smith v. RobinsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Florence County School District Four v. Carter Ex Rel. CarterSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- American Geophysical Union v. Texaco Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1994
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- Frank G. And Dianne G., Parents of a Disabled Student, Anthony G. v. Board of Education of Hyde Park, Central School District, Docket No. 04-4981-CvCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2006
- R.B. Ex Rel. F.B. v. Napa Valley Unified School DistrictCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
- Estate of Lance v. Lewisville Independent School DistrictCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2014
- C.L. v. Scarsdale Union Free School DistrictCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2014
- J.S. v. Scarsdale Union Free School DistrictDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2011
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.