Two recent Supreme Court decisions have a major effect on special education litigation. The first requires schools to provide "related services" of a paramedical nature to handicapped children; the second limits school board liability for attorney's fees in successful special education lawsuits. (TE)

Discusses three federal cases: "Hall v. Board of School Commissioners of Mobile County, Alabama," involving distribution of union literature in school; "Board of Education of Rogers, Arkansas, v. McCluskey," regarding student discipline policies; and "Duro v. District Attorney, Second Judicial District of North…

Examines a recent decision by the Sixth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in "Montgomery v. Carr," which determined whether the law permits a school board to have an antinepotism or conflict-of-interest policy that prohibits spouses, parents, and children from working in the same school or district. The court found that the school district…

In three recent cases, courts upheld school officials' decisions to prohibit students' school-based religious activities. Contends that the school boards and courts failed to exercise sufficient care in weighing students' right to engage in private religious activity during free time. (MLF)

Procedural burden-of-proof issues led Federal Circuit Courts to affirm changes in pupil assignment systems in Norfolk, Virginia, but reject changes in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. The Supreme Court's decision not to review the Virginia case leaves school boards and federal courts without guidance on questions raised by resegregation. (MLF)

Relevant court cases suggest that administrators develop communication regulatory policies that restrict use of the school as a communications forum by both inside and outside interest groups. (CJH)

In the federal case from New Jersey, "Taxman v. Board of Education of Township of Piscataway," the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a school board cannot use affirmative-action guidelines to decide which employees will be laid off. This article explains the precedents upon which the court based its August 1996 decision. (LMI)

Board members should learn from two court decisions about the limits the First Amendment places on chain-of-command policies. Employees who have complaints about matters that affect the public may not be prohibited from bypassing the superintendent and coming directly to the school board. (MLF)